Chief jailed 15 years for raping schoolgirl

By Staff Reporter

RUSAPE – The reign of Magaya Gunguwo (83) as Chief Chitsunge of Buhera ended disgracefully when Rusape regional magistrate, Mr Livingstone Chipadza, on Monday sentenced him to 15 years in jail for raping a schoolgirl under his custody on several occasions.

Chief Chitsunge was denying the rape charges. He was convicted after a full trial. The traditionalist will serve 10 years as five were suspended on the usual grounds.

Defence lawyer Mr Kumbirai Masasire, of C. Mutsahuni Chikore and Partners, Legal Practitioners had pleaded for a lighter sentence during mitigation, but Mr Chipadza concurred with Rusape area prosecutor Mr Tirivanhu Mutyasira, that rape was a serious crime that “deserves no mercy”.

When Mr Chipadza pronounced his guilty verdict, Chief Chitsunge quaked, rolled his eyes endless and scratched his head in disbelief. His aides and relatives, who packed the gallery, were equally shocked as Mr Chipadza castigated the chief as “a morally decadent” leader unbefitting to be a chief.

His aides said they would sell his cattle to raise money to appeal against both the conviction and sentence.

“We have to sell all his cattle. What purpose can they serve other than save him,” said one of the aides.

Mr Masasire confirmed the development.

“I was given an instruction from his relatives to appeal to the High Court against the conviction and sentence,” he said.

Mr Chipadza blasted Chief Chitsunge for masquerading as a philanthropist when he promised to cater for the welfare and education of the girl during her stay with him. The magistrate said the chief’s real intention was to “rubbish and deflower her”.

Mr Chipadza said damage inflicted on the victim would forever haunt her socialisation and academic progression. Mr Chipadza said Chief Chitsunge had lied in his failed bid to evade jail.

He said the chief misled the court that he surrendered the girl to her mother so that she would get a birth certificate, yet evidence produced in court showed that the girl already had obtained one.

The chief also failed to validate his claims that the girl’s mother was conniving with Headman Amato Chamatumba and Headman Tizvione whom he said were eyeing the throne. Headman Chamatumba was the acting Chief Chitsungo prior to the accused incumbent’s ascendency and consecration.

“This offence was pre-planned because you were supposed to return the girl to her mother on your return from the chief’s conference, but instead you started raping and abusing her to a point that she was regarded (by nurses) as a sexually active woman. She suffered in despondency as she stayed with you.

“The girl will be haunted throughout her life. For 83 years you have been a law abiding citizen, but you tarnished that when you committed this shameful offence. Your moral blameworthy is high.

“What can society expect from a morally corrupt leader like you? Can society be led by a rapist like you? You were given the young girl in good faith as you had promised to cater for her and pay for her education, but you turned into a rogue by rubbishing and raping her.

“You are the chief, your subjects expect you to be exemplary, but when you behave in such a manner, what will the community learn? Your subjects cannot learn anything because as a leader, you are corrupt,” ruled Mr Chipadza.

Mr Chipadza further pointed that as married man, Gunguwo was supposed to gratify and limit his sexual appetite to his wife.

“As a married man, you were supposed to quench you sexual appetite with your wife. You asked for the kid to help you and took the opportunity to rubbish her. You were given the girl in good faith, but you ended up raping her.

“You had plans to rape her. Cases of rape are becoming very prevalent as young girls are falling victim to people of your disposition. Your moral blameworthy is very high and the court doubts if you are properly looking after the five children currently under your custody.”

Mr Chipadze said Chief Chitsunge failed to adduce evidence of an unholy alliance between the girl’s mother and rivals he claimed were vying for the chieftainship.

“That is a far-fetched allegation which the court cannot take as credible. The complainant and her mother are respectful of the chief, they hold you in high esteem and rely on you for a living and for them to fabricate the rape is impossible.

“The fact that they went to Radio Zimbabwe does not mean there was connivance with your protagonists. They had reported the matter to police, but were frustrated because the police had taken a lackadaisical attitude in their investigation forcing them to approach the radio station to bring the matter to light. This should not be misconstrued as connivance with your rivals in the Chitsunge Chieftainship.”

Mr Chipadze added that the defence dismally failed to prove its assertion that the victim was of loose morals and frequented beer halls looking for men.

“The court cannot take that. There was no evidence to support this. The victim was a credible witness. She did not disclose her abuse even to her mother as she knew that they were materially depended on the chief. Her falling ill eventually opened the opportunity for her to divulge her abuse when she was taken to Pokoteke Clinic where the abuse was discovered.

“She has been consistent in telling nurses Aquiline Mbizi and Tanyaradzwa Tsuro, who attended to her Pokoteke Clinic, her mother, Patricia Chirambira, police and radio Zimbabwe that the accused person had raped her.”

In mitigation, Mr Masasire pleaded for lenient sentence arguing that the traditionalist was a geriatric and a first offender. He added that his client’s health had deteriorated and required periodic medication.

“He is 83 and his health has deteriorated. He is a family man with an equally geriatric wife of 70 years. The court should exercise an element of mercy and pass a lenient custodial sentence of 10 years with three years being suspended for five years,” said Mr Masasire.

Mr Mutyasira countered this, vouching for a lengthy custodial sentence.

He said Chief Chistunge was a man of authority, who presides over civil disputes and was aware of the criminal nature of his conduct.

“He is not an ignorant man. The victim and her mother relied on him for livelihood, but he took advantage of that to deflower and abuse the child. So mercy cannot be expected to a person of his status. I oppose the 10 years as suggested by the defence because it is inadequate to meet justice,” said Mr Mutyasira.