FIGHTING for a lesser sentence, convicted Deputy Sheriff Vusi Charles Mncina has asked the High Court to consider revenge, provocation, humiliation, his health problems and responsibility for eight children when determining his sentence for killing four women and attempting to kill another.
In his written submissions on mitigation and extenuation, Mncina argued that the killings were influenced by the circumstances surrounding his relationship with his girlfriend, Cynthia Khulile Shongwe.
He pleaded with the court that the sentences for all five offences run concurrently.
Mncina was convicted of killing Shongwe, Nonhlanhla Thwala, Lungile Shongwe and Fikile Shongwe, as well as attempting to murder Thembi Mkhwanazi.
The gruesome incident happened at Goje Township, Ezulwini on October 28, 2023. The matter is before Judge Titus Mlangeni. It proceeds tomorrow.
The defence acknowledged the seriousness of the offences, but argued that the court should consider the circumstances of the incident and Mncina’s personal circumstances before imposing sentence.
The submissions relied on Section 295(1) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act of 1938, which requires a court convicting a person of murder to state whether extenuating circumstances exist.
The provision further directs the court to consider the standards of behaviour of an ordinary person of the class of the community to which the convicted person belongs.
The defence argued that Mncina was influenced by alleged provocation and humiliation arising from Shongwe’s conduct.
According to the submissions, Mncina also felt isolated after his friends left the party while Shongwe’s friends remained present. The lawyers further submitted that Mncina had started consuming alcoholic beverages early in the day, which may have affected his ability to exercise self-control and make sound judgements.
They referred to the court’s finding that the attack on the victims was most probably an act of revenge, arguing that this consideration should extend to all four murders.
The defence pointed to the court’s finding that Shongwe’s killing was an act of revenge and that there exists extenuating circumstances in respect of her murder.
It argued that the same reasoning should apply to the other three women because the court had also found that their killings were most probably as an act of revenge.
The submissions also referred to evidence given by Mkhwanazi, who reportedly testified that Shongwe’s mood had not changed after she emerged from a bedroom with Mncina.
The defence argued that this suggested there was conduct that triggered Mncina’s reaction.
To support its argument on extenuating circumstances, the defence cited Mandla Bhekithemba Matsenjwa versus Rex, in which the Supreme Court discussed factors that may reduce an offender’s moral blameworthiness.
…Cites eight children, health problems
IN mitigation, the defence told the court that the Deputy Sheriff Vusi Charles Mncina was 48 years old, married and a first-time offender when committing the murders.
The submissions stated that he had eight children and was the principal provider for his family because his wife was unemployed.
Six of his children were still attending school, in primary school and high school, while another was in Grade Zero.
The defence added that Mncina suffered from gout, ulcers and kidney problems.
Before his arrest, he was self-employed as a deputy sheriff for the Manzini District, a property agent and a car dealer. The lawyers further submitted that Mncina surrendered himself to the police after committing the offences and co-operated with investigators by making a statement and a confession before a judicial officer.
They said he had expressed remorse and publicly apologised during his evidence-in-chief. According to the submissions, Mncina also attempted to send people to convey apologies to the victims’ families. However, the messengers were allegedly overcome by fear and failed to deliver the message.
The defence acknowledged that the murders were serious and warranted sentences capable of deterring potential offenders.
However, the lawyers urged the court to consider the history of Mncina’s relationship with Shongwe, arguing that they had reached a stage where they were living together and seeking to establish a home.
They submitted that the relationship had influenced Mncina’s conduct and should form part of the circumstances considered during sentencing. The defence argued that the loss of four lives would leave an indelible mark on Mncina’s conscience and was not something that can be worn as a badge of honour. The lawyers asked the court to calculate the sentence from October 28, 2023 the date of Mncina’s arrest. In conclusion, the defence asked the court to consider Mncina’s apologies to the victims’ families, while acknowledging that the apologies could not bring their loved ones back.
Mncina’s lawyers have asked the court to order that the sentences for the five offences run concurrently.
