Iuze Mukube
Submitting its closing arguments on 14 February 2025, the State claims to have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that alleged pickaxe murderer Barnabas Nawaseb was not defending himself when he attacked his victim.
Nawaseb is facing charges of housebreaking with the intent to murder and murder, read with the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act.
Metihisia Tanises, the accused’s common-law wife and mother of his two children, succumbed to her injuries after the accused had brutally hit her with a pickaxe on 21 December 2022 in Khorixas.
Nawaseb pleaded not guilty to the charges, explaining he had assaulted Tanises while fending off an attack that was being perpetrated on him by her.
Crucially, he said the deceased had grabbed him by his testicles, where he had felt excruciating pain, and as a result, used an axe and chopped the deceased countless times on the head for her to let go.
However, the State, represented by Basson Lilungwe, held that due to the type of weapon used and the injuries sustained by Tanises and the circumstances under which she died, the accused acted with direct intent and, therefore, must be found guilty.
His defence of self-defence was disputed by witness testimony from a medical doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem.
The doctor found that the deceased had sustained a traumatic brain injury caused by multiple chops to the skull, and at least five chop wounds to the head.
The accused’s statement that he had defended himself from the deceased grabbing his testicles was put to the test, and the doctor responded it was impossible for Tanises to have continued to hold onto his privates while she was being severely hit with an axe.
In the presence of these two mutually-destructive versions, Lilungwe submitted that the court needs to carefully look at and determine which version is reasonably true.
“This was a brutal and persistent attack on a defenceless woman who was attacked by her lover in the comfort of her home where she felt the safest. The accused used a dangerous weapon and savagely attacked the mother of his children, not caring whether she survived the attack or not,” he said.
Moreover, the accused does not deny he assaulted the deceased, but denies the unlawfulness of the attack, which is quite clear that the issue of him having been grabbed by the genitals is a belated defence that should not be accepted.
Lilungwe argued that it is trite law that the courts will be failing society if they accept fanciful defences such as the accused’s, as what the accused had presented was a single narrative not backed by any credible evidence and, therefore, should not be accepted as it is false beyond reasonable doubt.
Additionally, another aspect to consider, he said, is the conduct of the accused after the incident, as it is that of someone whose intention was to murder and not defend himself.
“He did not care about what happened to the deceased. In actual fact, he went to sleep until the early morning hours, clearly not having any respect for human life,” said the State.
Meanwhile, the accused’s lawyer, Petrus Grusshaper, submitted the State failed to prove the offence of murder and that the accused must not be found guilty.