THE Crown has asked the High Court to reject Deputy Sheriff Vusi Charles Mncina’s claim that he cannot remember circumstances around the shooting incident that left four women dead and find him guilty of four counts of murder and one of attempted murder.
The Crown argued that Mncina’s conduct before and after the incident demonstrated that he was conscious and acted voluntarily.
The matter is before Judge Titus Mlangeni, with the Crown represented by prosecuting counsel Sandile Mdluli and Mncina by Xolani Mthethwa.
Mncina is charged with four counts of murder and one count of attempted murder arising from the October 28, 2023 shooting at Goje Township, Ezulwini, in which Cynthia Khulile Shongwe, Lungile Shongwe, Fikile Shongwe and Nonhlanhla Thwala were killed.
Thuli Nokuthula Mkhwanazi survived after allegedly being shot in the chest.
Mncina pleaded not guilty to all five charges. In the Crown’s closing submissions, Mdluli argued that Mncina’s claim that he found himself holding a firearm after the shooting and could not recall what had happened did not create reasonable doubt.
“The court is therefore invited to distinguish between lack of memory and lack of intention. They are not synonymous,” the Crown submitted.
The prosecutor said Mncina’s own evidence placed him at the scene immediately before the shooting and established that he had confronted Cynthia after seeing her with another man.
Mdluli said Mncina had admitted that Cynthia was his lover, that he was hurt by what he had seen and that he confronted her. He had also admitted being at the pantry immediately before the shooting and later finding himself holding the firearm after people had been shot. The Crown argued that his conduct after the shooting was inconsistent with someone who had been continuously unconscious or incapable of controlling his actions.
Mncina allegedly asked Sandile Mazibuko to transport him to Lobamba Police Station, made telephone calls during the journey, surrendered the firearm to the police and requested to be detained.
“These are not actions of a person who was continuously unconscious or incapable of exercising control over his conduct,” the Crown submitted.
The prosecution relied on Rex versus Celani Sicaca Nkambule, where the High Court scrutinised a blackout defence, and argued that defences such as automatism and amnesia required careful consideration.
The Crown also relied on the evidence of surviving victim Mkhwanazi, who testified that Mncina shot Cynthia before firing multiple shots inside the confined pantry where the women were gathered. Police recovered six empty cartridges, two bullets and a black holster from the scene.
On intention, the Crown argued that the law did not require proof that Mncina had planned or premeditated the killings. It submitted that intention could arise through dolus directus or dolus eventualis.
Relying on Rex versus Simanga Ntulo Kunene and Rex versus Bongani Matsenjwa, the Crown argued that repeatedly firing a firearm into a small pantry occupied by several people demonstrated at least dolus eventualis.
On the attempted murder charge, the Crown submitted that Mkhwanazi’s survival did not negate the alleged intention to kill her. The prosecutor concluded that the eyewitness, medical and physical evidence, together with Mncina’s conduct before and after the shooting and his surrender of the firearm, established his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
It therefore asked the High Court to find Mncina guilty on all four murder counts and the attempted murder charge.
