Appeal dismissal: Convicted rapist, robber’s 17-year sentence upheld

Justice Clever Tsikwa ruled that the employer did not follow the mandatory retrenchment procedure before directing the employee to stop reporting for duty. “The court comes to the conclusion that there was no retrenchment to talk about and the decision of the arbitrator cannot be faulted,” the judge said. “This application is a clear example of unnecessary delays in the administration of justice. It has no merit,” said Justice Chiweshe.

Fidelis Munyoro-Chief Court Reporter

A CHINHOYI armed robber had his appeal thrown out, leaving him to serve a 17-year effective sentence for two counts of robbery and one count of rape committed during a violent home invasion in January 2023.

Prince Dube had challenged both his conviction and sentence, arguing that the evidence against him was flawed and the punishment overly harsh.

However, Justices Phildah Muzofa and Catherine Bachi-Mzawazi ruled against him on Friday, upholding the trial court’s findings that he was positively identified as one of the intruders who terrorised a family in St Ives, Chinhoyi. During the robbery, the complainants, a married couple, were assaulted, threatened, and forced to surrender money and household items, including pots and a cellphone.

The situation escalated further when the wife was raped while her husband and children were forced to hide under the bed. Dube’s main grounds for appeal included alleged irregularities in the identification parade and the argument that the recovered pots, which he claimed belonged to his wife, could not conclusively link him to the crime.

However, the court dismissed these claims, stating the evidence against him was overwhelming.

“The intruders spent about an hour in the house, which was illuminated, giving the complainants enough time to observe them,” said Justice Muzofa.

She noted that the complainants had identified Dube by distinctive features, including a scar on his forehead and a gap between his teeth.

Regarding sentencing, the High Court found no misdirection by the trial court.

The robbery was committed under aggravating circumstances, as Dube and his accomplices were armed with machetes and a knife, and the complainants sustained injuries during the attack.

The rape was deemed particularly degrading, occurring in the presence of the victim’s husband and children.

The court concluded that the 17-year sentence — 8 years for robbery (with 3 years suspended) and 12 years for rape — was appropriate given the severity of the crimes.