CRI/T/42/34

IN THE
HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

In the
Matter of :

REX

v

KHALAKI
LETELA

REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT

Filed by
the Hon. Chief Justice Mr. Justice T.S. Cotran on the 25th day of
July 1984

The
accused Khalaki Letela was indicted before me on a charge of
murdering 'Mamookho Letela, his sister-in-law (deceased) on or
about
12th August 1933 at or near Ha Lebopo in the district of Mokhotlong.

It was
common cause that the accused stabbed the deceased and caused her
death in circumstances, also common cause, which will be
shortly
described. The accused, personally and through his counsel Mr.
Matsau, offered to plead guilty to culpable homicide on
the ground
that he, the accused, did not have the subjective intent to kill
because he believed the deceased was bewitching him.

The
Crown's case was not seriously challenged. The main witness was the
accused's own kith and kin, namely, Masheshena Letela (P.W.2)
the
accused senior uncle and head of the family who had brought him up as
a son and his brother Mpho (P.W.1).

2

The
accused is married but his wife had gone to work in Natal and seems
to have lost interest in her household. Accused and his
wife have one
child living with her family. We know that this child had, some three
or four years previously, been ill but this
illness did not persist.
We also know that the accused's father Paul married twice. Selelai
Letela was his half brother, i.e. a
son from his father's first wife.
The accused was a son from the second wife. When Paul the father died
the accused's mother inherited
her husband's three fields and tilled
them. She died in 1975 and after her death an agreement was reached,
with the chief's blessing,
that one of the fields will be tilled by
Selelai and two fields by the accused. The deceased 'Mamookho was
Selelai's wife.

About a
week or so before the stabbing the accused, who had a seperate house,
went to his uncle and complained that he was feeling
ill. The accused
seemed frightened and told his uncle that an animal was "chocking"
him. The uncle saw no animal around
and understood that the accused
felt that he was being bewitched but he did not say who was the
cause. Furthermore the accused
seemed to be taking some herbal
medicines prescribed by one Kimano. To cut a long story short the
uncle allowed the accused to
stay in his house.

On the
evening of 12th August the accused arrived at his uncle's house to
sleep as he had been doing in the previous week. Earlier
both of them
had been to a drinking party. The uncle was first to return home.
When the accused arrived he seemed agitated and
requested his uncle
to accompany him to the

3

deceased's
home barely 50 paces away. The uncle refused. Two lads were sleeping
in the house, namely, Mpho and Ramahetlana. The
accused woke them up
and requested them to go and call two other persons, viz, Tanki and
Rampai. Tanki (who was another brother
of the accused) and Rampai
were duly called. When they arrived at the house the accused asked
them to accompany him to the deceased's
home. They refused and
departed. The accused then requested Mpho (his other younger brother)
and Ramahetlana to accompany him there.
Ramahetlana did not testify,
but Mpho did. He said that the accused knocked at the deceased's door
and demanded to be admitted.
The deceased replied she had no matches
to put on a light. Accused ordered Mpho to fetch some matches. On his
way back with the
matches he heard screaming from inside the
deceased's house. There was light on and the accused must have made
his way in. He ran
to inform his uncle. The uncle takes up the story
from there. He found the accused lying on top of the deceased who was
prostrate
on her stomach and the accused was stabbing her all over
the body with a knife. The accused would not stop. He said he is not
afraid
even if he was to be shot. Finally the knife was wrested from
him, but he managed to inflict over 14 stab wounds (according to the

policeman who examined the body on the following day) and after that
he kept kicking her with his boots.

The
deceased had died a very violent death. The accused says that she was
bewitching him. He says that he formed this opinion because
she owned
a black cat and one day when he was lying on bed in his own house
this black cat entered and jumped

4

over him.
When she did so he felt numb all over the body. In addition he
quarrelled with his sister-in-law over the fields inherited
from his
father and he attributed the illness of his child to her.

Now Mr.
Matsau submits that accused did not have the subjective intent to
kill. With respect I do not think the argument is sound.
What may be
true is that the accused "subjectively" thought the
deceased was bewitching him, but that is not equivalent
to lack of
intent to kill. The evidence was that accused was in his sober
senses, that he knew what he was doing, that he did appreciate
the
consequences, that he was prepared to accept them even though they
could have meant his own death at the hand of the law. The
accused
has been normal throughout his life. I have sent the accused to see
Dr. Mohapeloa who testified he suffered no mental abnormality
at all.
The Psychatric report is in the record.

In my
opinion the accused is guilty of murder although I am prepared to
find that extenuating circumstances exist by reason of lack
of
premeditation and sudden impulse. One of my assessors thought the
accused should receive the death sentence but was persuaded

otherwise.

I
sentence the accused to 15 years imprisonment. Both my assessors
agree.

CHIEF
JUSTICE

25th
July 1984

For
Defendant : Mr. Matsau

For Crown
: Mr. Kalamanathan