Stepsisters, stepmum murder: Soldier denied bail
MBABANE – The soldier who allegedly killed his two stepsisters and stepmother has been denied bail.
Among its findings, the High Court was of the view that Morris Dlamini failed to adduce facts to prove the existence of exceptional circumstances to satisfy the court.
This is a requirement of the Criminal 3rocedure and (vidence Act, of 1 . The bail application was heard by Judge Sabelo Masuku.
Morris is facing five charges. In three counts, he is charged with murder in that on September , 0 , at Lomshiyo in northern Hhohho, he allegedly shot and killed his stepmother, Thandi Dlamini (nee Lukhele), together with two of his half-sisters, Andy Dlamini and Dumsile Dlamini.
Malicious
The two other charges are malicious injury to property, in that he allegedly damaged a BMW 1 series, a black Lenovo laptop and money in cash. He is also alleged to have damaged a blue Ford Ranger belonging to one Gcebile Dlamini.
Morris averred in his founding affidavit that the facts that led to the charges emanated from an attack against him at his home by a group of people, including the three deceased. The attack, he said, followed what he described as a protracted land dispute between himself and the children of Thandi, who is one of the deceased. Morris was represented by Sivesonkhe Ngwenya of Sivesonkhe Ngwenya Attorneys.
The Crown, which was represented by Alison Mkhaliphi, argued that the three charges of murder were listed in the fifth schedule of the Criminal 3rocedure and (vidence Act as amended.
As such, the Crown averred that Morris was required to adduce evidence to the satisfaction of the court that exceptional circumstances existed, which in the interest of justice would permit his release.
Barracks
According to Mkhaliphi, the soldier, who is based at 3hocweni Army Barracks, did not comply with that requirement.
Mkhaliphi submitted that it would not be in the interest of justice to release Morris on bail, because he failed to adduce facts to prove the existence of exceptional circumstances to the satisfaction of the court.
Morris had submitted that special circumstances existed, which warranted being released on bail. He said he was employed by the Government of (swatini as a soldier. He also stated that he was married to two wives and had children. His wives, according to Morris, were unemployed and depended on him for survival.
He further told the court that his continued detention would result in the loss of his job. Morris argued that it was in the interest of justice that he be granted bail.
He also stated that he had demonstrated and proved the existence of exceptional circumstances in that he was attacked at his homestead with his house being pelted with stones and had fire set outside his house to burn him to death by his assailants.
He submitted that he took all and everything in his power to request the police to intervene. Instead, according to the soldier, they ignored him or took the issue of reporting lightly. He accused the police of dereliction of duty.
Judge Masuku said the question that needed to be answered was, did this evidence establish the existence of exceptional circumstances, which in the interest of justice would permit his release"
The judge said Morris’s submission that he was likely to lose his job was not a factor to be taken into account.According to the court, the submission constituted natural ramifications of detention and nothing of a kind.
“Similarly, the fact that the applicant (Morris) is married to two wives who are unemployed, with children still attending school are normal hardships or inconvenience that are unavoidably occasioned by incarceration and are by no means ‘one of a kind’. Further that this country is among countries with the highest unemployment rate in the sub-Saharan Africa also does not help the applicant,” said Judge Masuku.
The attacks, Morris averred, occurred at his homestead with stones, threats and fire that was set outside his house by his assailants, said the judge, were also not exceptional to set him free on bail.
The judge stated that it may as well be telling signs that if released on bail, he may face some hostility with his family, his assailants and members of his community.
Circumstances
The court continued to point out that Morris also blamed the inaction of the police, bias and dereliction of duty and had submitted that had they discharged their duties on time, the incident would not have occurred. He submitted that this in itself constitutes exceptional circumstances.
Judge Masuku said the court found it hard to conclude that these allegations constituted exceptional circumstances other than being speculative and conjectural or supposition about what could have happened if the police had acted promptly.
“It is not facts or evidence of a kind,” further mentioned the judge.
The Crown also told the court that Morris was likely to interfere or intimidate State witnesses. Section ( )(c) of the Criminal 3rocedure and (vidence Act says it shall be in the interest of justice to refuse bail where there is a likelihood that the accused if released on bail, may attempt to influence or intimidate witnesses or to conceal or destroy evidence.
The Crown relied on the affidavit of Detective Sergeant Thammy Mabuza supported by one Lungile Dlamini. It was submitted in arguments by the Crown counsel that witnesses, in this case, are well-known to Morris because the killing incident took place in a family set-up.
Shooting
2ne of the key witnesses who witnessed the shooting of her family and who was pursued by Morris, according to the Crown, was Lungile and Morris is said to have threatened to kill her.
Lungile stated in her affidavit that ‘it was the accused person who provoked the whole scenario in that he wanted to beat Thandi, the deceased’. She said she tried to resolve the situation by assisting Thandi from being assaulted by the soldier and there was confrontation and ‘when shooting and killing Thandi uttered words to Lungile to say he is going to kill her as well’. Lungile alleged that during the shooting, the applicant also pursued her and she escaped the shooting because the soldier was out of ammunition.
The court found that if released on bail, Morris would interfere with Crown witnesses and endanger the safety of the public. liNelihood of the $ppellant interring with potential &rown witnesses when itself noted that there were family hostilities and beats reason how the appellant would interfere with people he is in conflict and/or bad blood with and does not have any control and/or influence over then. 7he court a Tuo erred both in fact and in law by finding and holding that the appellant failed to adduce e[ceptional circumstances when on a balance of probabilities he had indicated that he was attacNed at his homestead on less than hours by deceased and further that the police were informed and never tooN action and instead went to party with the family of the deceased and to that e[tent that is a very e[ceptional circumstance since it is trite that every person is entitled to self protection.