22 Apr 2024

Murder convict, Thabe Alosere on Friday had mixed fortune when the Court of Appeal (CoA) reduced his sentence by a quarter from 40 years, but his appeal on conviction was dismissed. Alosere was on March last year, convicted and sentenced for a seemingly contract murder of Naga Mogobe that occurred in 2013 at Mapontela cattle post near Tutume after a trial following his plea of not guilty. 

His alleged contractor died during trial, thereby leaving Alosere as the sole accused in the matter, and he was ultimately found guilty after the High Court ruled that the prosecution managed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. 

In his grounds of appeal, Alosere had argued that the High Court committed fatal irregularity by passing judgment ahead of the date he was supposed to file his final submissions, which he argued violated section 181 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. 

He argued that the move by the trial court therefore denied him an opportunity to present his mitigation factors. 

Alosere also argued that the High Court misdirected itself by placing reliance on an inadmissible confession attributed to him, which he said was also used as the pivot of finding him guilty. 

He also challenged the determination by the trial court that the prosecution had managed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt when evidence put before it suggested otherwise, and that the sentence meted against him induced a sense of shock and violated the sentencing triad. 

Alosere however, later chose to abandon the first two grounds of his appeal. 

In its judgment, the CoA however, disagreed with the appellant that the trial court found his conviction on inadmissible statements as the appellant had freely offered the information to various witnesses at different stages of investigations, which the witnesses based their statements on. 

The CoA also ruled that nonetheless, the statements cited were unequivocal, meaning that the appellant still had a chance to provide at the relevant time that he had certain defences and explanations to the killing. 

It concluded that the admissions, close to a confession as they seemed, did not amount to a confession within the meaning of Section 228 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. 

Regarding the sentence, the CoA however, agreed with the appellant’s argument that the 40-year sentence he was slapped with was far too excessive and varied substantially from sentences that other courts of the same jurisdiction have previously imposed. 

It concluded therefore that considering the facts against the backdrop of the case, the sentence was indeed excessive. 

The sentence was the reduced to 30 years, backdated to when the appellant was taken into custody. 

ends