Man Who Assaulted Friend Over Tomatoes Acquitted Of Murder

A man who assaulted his friend over stolen tomatoes, with the victim dying days later, has been acquitted of murder and convicted of assault.

Kudzai Mutangadura was cleared of murder by the Bulawayo High Court, with Justice Ngoni Nduna finding the evidence did not support a murder conviction and returning a guilty verdict on the lesser charge of assault.

The court heard that Mutangadura had left a truckload of tomatoes at a bus stop while he accompanied a friend to his homestead to dip cattle.

During his absence, the now-deceased allegedly took some of the tomatoes, sold them and kept the money.

When Mutangadura returned and found tomatoes missing, he demanded payment, but was told the money had already been spent.

A confrontation followed, during which he assaulted the deceased. He later took him to the police station, where he filed a report. It was agreed at the station that the deceased would repay the money.

The deceased was found dead on a date that remains in dispute. His body was taken for a post-mortem, which found that he had died from injuries he had sustained.

Mutangadura admitted assaulting the deceased on the chest and taking him to the police station, but denied inflicting the fatal injuries.

The State led evidence from two witnesses, neither of whom could say with certainty when the confrontation happened. Their evidence was shaky and limited to recalling that they had seen the two in conflict. It was not clear whether the assault was so severe as to cause fatal injuries.

The court also heard that the deceased was a heavy drinker and was living alone at one of the witnesses’ homes.

Justice Nduna said the central question was when the assault took place.

Mutangadura maintained that he assaulted the deceased towards the end of September 2024 and that the deceased was found dead on 5 October 2024.

“The witnesses’ testimony was vague. They were no longer certain of the date on which they saw the accused and the deceased in conflict,” the judge said.

“Clearly, it is not safe to conclude that the accused inflicted the fatal injuries sustained by the deceased in the circumstances of this matter. There remains a real possibility that the deceased sustained the fatal assault elsewhere.

“For the avoidance of doubt it is declared that where a court finds that part but not all of the facts of an offence charged have been proved, it shall nevertheless convict the accused of that offence if the facts that are proved disclose all the essential elements of that offence.

“It is clear, therefore, that a person appearing before a court may be convicted on a competent verdict where the evidence does not prove the offence charged but establishes a less serious offence in respect of which it is competent for the court to return a verdict of guilty.”

Justice Nduna said while the exact date of the assault was unclear, Mutangadura’s admission was sufficient to sustain an assault conviction.

The judge said it was unlawful for Mutangadura to assault the deceased, but the evidence did not prove that the force used caused the death, noting that the deceased appeared to be in good health afterwards.

“The accused admits assaulting the deceased but denies that the assault caused the deceased’s death. On the evidence before the court, the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death of the deceased,” said Justice Nduna.

“However, the accused’s own admissions, together with the evidence led, establish beyond reasonable doubt that he unlawfully assaulted the deceased. Accordingly, the accused is found not guilty of murder but guilty of assault on the competent verdict.”