adminMashudu Netsianda Senior Court Reporter
THE Bulawayo High Court yesterday fined a Gweru police officer $300 or six months in jail, setting aside her 18-months jail term imposed by a lower court for stealing her friend’s bank card and withdrawing $500.Justice Maxwell Takuva set aside Florence Mandau’s sentence following an appeal filed by her lawyer, Brian Dube.
The lawyer argued that the lower court magistrate who presided over the matter erred in disregarding the mitigating factors and reasons given by Mandau for the commission of the crime in February last year.
A Gweru magistrate sentenced Mandau to 18 months in jail and suspended six months for five years on condition that she did not within that period commit a similar crime.
In his ruling, Justice Takuva who was sitting with Justice Nokuthula Moyo at the criminal appeals court yesterday, said although Mundau pleaded guilty to theft and unauthorised use of someone’s pin number, the sentence by the trial magistrate of Gweru magistrate’s court was too harsh.
“It’s aggravating that Mundau, a member of the Zimbabwe Republic Police premeditated the crime. Of course, she breached the trust by her friend, but her conduct, especially when she paid a restitution was commendable, hence sending her to prison would be unduly harsh,” said Justice Takuva.
“Mundau’s effective 12 months sentence is therefore set aside and she is accordingly sentenced to $300 or six months in jail and the remaining six months are wholly suspended for five years,” said the judge.
Mundau, through her lawyer, challenged the sentence by the lower court, saying the magistrate failed to give due regard to the fact that she was a first offender who did not waste the court’s time by pleading guilty to the charges.
“The court aquo never made any reference to the fact that Mundau is a female offender. It’s clear that women are not cushioned to commit crimes to go unpunished rather, it is trite law that women offenders should be treated with more leniency as compared to their male counterparts and this was never taken into consideration during her sentencing,” said Dube.
He said in sentencing Mundau, the lower court did not consider what she raised in her mitigation.
“Mundau’s evidence in mitigation was that her child fell ill and in a desperate attempt to get funds to have her child treated, she committed the crime.
“The aspects of premeditation could not be concluded at that stage because no evidence had been led to prove that indeed Mundau had planned this for some time,” said Dube.
Online Reporter