R v Voets (Homicide Case 63 of 2019) [2021] MWHCCrim 3 (13 May 2021)

The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR ; IN THE REPUBLIC OF MALAWI IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI CRIMINAL DIVISION: PRINCIPAL REGISTRY HOMICIDE CASE NO 63 OF 2019 The Republic -v - Philip Voets CORAM HONOURABLE LADY JUSTICE DOROTHY DEGABRIELE Ms. B. Kumwenda Mr. P. Minjale Mr. H. Amos Ms. V Mombera for the State for the Accused Official Interpreter Court Reporter 1. Introduction 1.1. The accused person herein, Philip Voets, has been charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 209 of the Penal Code (Cap. 7: 01) of the Laws of Malawi. The brief facts are that the accused person caused the death of his wife, Elizabeth Betty Khozi-Voets, 48 years old, following a physical fight on 21 May 2019. The accused person denied the charge and the Court entered a plea of not guilty. 1.2. The State paraded three (3) witnesses to prove the case against the accused person. The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 2. The Evidence for the Prosecution 2.1. The first witness for the prosecution (PW1) was Blandina Khozi Sambo, a sister to the deceased Elizabeth Khozi - Voets. Her evidence was that: 2.1.1. She came from a family of 6 girls and the deceased was the elder sister. The witness (PW1) is a psychotherapist by profession, currently residing in Chinyonga in the City of Blantyre. She was informed by her mother that Betty Elizabeth Khozi Voets had died in the evening of 19 May 2019. A certain Mr. Chaponda explained to PWV1 that when her sister had died, the accused person had asked Mr Chaponda to accompany him when he went to break the news to the family. PW1's mother lived in Machinjiri while the deceased and the accused person lived in Chilimba-Magalasi in the City of Blantyre. PW1 informed the Court that the accused person had told her that the deceased became sick, that she fell during the night, that in the morning she was taken to the hospital and was admitted; and that she died later on the same day she was admitted. 2.1.2. The witness was shocked that the accused person had not contacted the family when the deceased was sick, despite his having the contact numbers of the family. PWV1 was informed by the accused person that the hospital had stated that the deceased had died of sepsis. The accused person moved the body of Elizabeth Betty Khozi-Voets to the College of Medicine mortuary and including embalming. The accused made all preparations for the funeral person then informed the mother of the deceased. The witness and her siblings and the mother decided to privately view the body of the deceased despite being told that it was ready for burial. The family noticed that the deceased had a large swelling on her forehead, but the funeral programme proceeded. Some people who attended the funeral did not agree with the announced cause of death, and there was information that the accused person and the deceased had fought the night before her death. The family for the sought advice and obtained a warrant from a magistrate court exhumation of the body of the deceased. After the exhumation, an autopsy was carried out. The family covered the cost of exhumation. 2.1.3. The autopsy was carried out by Dr Dzamalala in the presence of the Police and CID officers and some family members. The accused person was called 1 The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR to give a statement to the Police before the autopsy was carried out. At the police station the accused person produced a letter which he said was in which the deceased was leaving her property to written by the deceased, him to care for on behalf of her sons. There was no-one from the family of the deceased who was claiming any property. On seeing the letter, PW1 concluded that the letter was written under duress. The result of the autopsy was that the deceased did not die of natural causes. The witness stated that when she walked up to give evidence, the accused person again stressed on the property and PW1 stated that she had nothing to do with the property because it was for the sons of the deceased, Dan and Eden. 2.1.4. In cross examination, PW1 stated that she had known the accused person since the year 2014 when he came from Belgium to Malawi and married the deceased. PW1 had a cordial relationship with her elder sister who looked after her, who also had a good mother and daughter relationship with her mother. PW1 was not sure how often they visited each other but since her mother was not mobile, the accused person used to pick-up the mother for the said visits. 2.1.5. The deceased and the accused person owned a bar and they would entertain friends and also take beer. PW1 acknowledged that the deceased was a drunkard. The deceased had told the witness that she had liver problems because of the continuous taking of alcohol. The deceased did not tell her of any problems or challenges in her relationship with the accused person. The accused person and the deceased lived together, they had workers and sometimes their son Dan stayed with them. The testament was left with the police and PW1 did not remember the exact contents. The deceased had two sons, Dan and Eden, 25 years and 27 years respectfully. 2.1.6. The neighbour who had told them about the fight, known as Linda, was advised by her own family not to give evidence. The deceased had also told PW1 that she had problems with her cervix and uterus. PW1 reported the the police station for purposes of getting a clearance of matter at In re-examination, she confirmed that the accused person did inform any member of the deceased's family of the sickness of the not deceased, or of her death immediately after she passed on. exhumation. The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 2.2. The second witness for the prosecution (PW2) was Detective inspector Patrick Mwale based at Chilimba Police Unit. 2.2.1. He tendered a number of documents into evidence, a. The order of exhumation obtained from Mbulumbuzi Magistrate court to exhume the body of late Elizabeth Khozi Voets that was on 25th May, 2019 marked and exhibited as Ex. P1; b. The investigation report marked and exhibited as Ex. P2; c. The autopsy examination, preliminary results obtained from the Forensic Pathologist Dzamalala marked and exhibited as Ex. P3; 15 photographs of process marked and exhibited as Ex. P4; the deceased taken before and during the autopsy d. e. The statement under caution of the accused person marked and exhibited as Ex. P5; and The formal charge marked and exhibited as Ex. P6 f. 2.2.2. PW2 informed the Court that PW1 reported the suspicious death of her sister on 25 May 2019. The sister had died on 21 May 2019 and was buried on 24 May 2019 at HHI cemetery. Pwe2 obtained an exhumation order and, with the assistance of the Blantyre City Assembly the body of the deceased was exhumed and a autopsy was conducted by Dr Dzamalala which revealed that death was not by natural causes. The accused person was arrested and charged with the offence of murder, but he denied the charge. it was observed that the place was The scene of crime was visited, but already cleaned as the incident took place was on 21 May 2019. The witness also tendered the written letter/testament when he was recalled to the stand, which testament was marked as Ex. P7. 2.2.3. In cross examination, PW2 stated that he worked with Detective Sub the Inspector Bonjesi and Detective Khambadzo when carrying out investigations. The guard and the maid did not witness the incident but helped in taking the deceased to the hospital. The exhumation order was obtained from Mbulumbuzi Magistrate Court, but could be granted by any other court. 2.3. The third witness for the State (PW3) was Dr Charles Dzamalala, a pathologist by profession. He works at the College of Medicine in Blantyre. The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 2.3.1. He confirmed to have authored a 6 page report detailing a forensic autopsy examination on the body of the deceased, conducted on 26 May 2019, 5 days after her death. The exhumation process was carried out in the presence of Bruno Ndoma, one of the medical team member who was the Officer-in-Charge of the mortuary at College of Medicine. PW3 stated that the story that accompanied the body was told to him by others and it was not used as a basis for the findings. PW3 believes that the body tells its own In his investigations, PW3 carried out a body inspection, an external story. and internal examination, specimen analysis and review of documentary materials. 2.3.2. The first finding showed trauma to the left eye which made the orbit black, giving a black eye which is associated with traumatic bleeding in the sub- dural cavities between the skull and the brain. The trauma to the left orbital area caused the subdural haemorrhage, a slow bleeding from veins in the liver of the deceased showed fatty skull. The second finding was that changes, associated with chronic alcoholism but it was the first series of changes in the liver that happens due to alcoholism. The deceased's liver did not show the most severe changes which is liver cirrhosis. The third finding was that the deceased was anaemic which was established by visual and microscopic examination of internal organs specimens. The deceased had both yellow tissues and golden pigment which shows anaemia. The specimen from the deceased's body was tested for poisons and there was no poison. There was no sign of strangulation and there were no fractures on the skull or any of the bones. Further, the external examination showed bruises on the legs, chest and face of the deceased. PW3 formed the opinion, based on the scientific findings, that though the deceased was a drunkard, the said alcoholism was not fatal and the anaemia was not fatal and were subsequently not the cause of death. 2.3.3. The death of the deceased was caused by sub-dural haemorrhage, which was caused by trauma to the left frontal orbit. PW3 explained that bleeding in the head can be from a car accident, gunshot wound, a fall, or an assault. PW3 looked at a number of factors and excluded a motor vehicle accident. PW3 also discounted a fall being the cause of the trauma because falls have a The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR a pattern in that a person falls on one side of the body at a time, thereby injuries take a pattern on that same side of the body. PW3 explained that there would be no injuries on the other side of the body unless the person in this falls several times within a short period of time, which is very rare. case, the injuries on the deceased affected both sides of the body and the chest, but the main impact was in the left eye which lead to a black eye, leading to bleeding in the skull. The autopsy report is exhibited and marked as CD1. 2.3.4. IN cross examination, he stated that the deceased had passed away at Mwaiwathu Hospital on Tuesday 21 May 2019 and there were some changes in the body by the time the autopsy was carried out, but that the body was well preserved due to the embalming that was done. No brain scan was carried out during the autopsy, but the brain was examined. The there was hospital had carried out a CT scan which showed that haematoma, which is the bleeding that has solidified inside the skull, and it showed as the black eye. The hospital medical report showed that death was due to sepsis and sepsis means an infection. At this point counsel for the accused person entered the CT Scan as ID1. 2.3.5. In cross examination, PW3 did not know the accused person and was not aware if he was represented at the time the autopsy was being done. The autopsy process took 2 to 3 hours. The people present were documented in the report as observers. Three groups of people who witnessed the forensic autopsy process were: a) the CID police officers from Chilimba police station represented by Detective Inspector Mwale and Detective Sub-Inspector Kambazo; b) Family relatives Mabvuto Khozi brother to the deceased, Clement Khozi cousin and; c) a team at college of medicine, which included PW3, mortuary attendance, and the officer-in-charge of the mortuary. The police and the complainant hired him to carry out the examinations. And the college of medicine was paid the standard fee of MK300,000.00. 2.3.6. The witness stated that his opinion on the autopsy was not based on the story he was told as he did not own the narrative, but that the body told its own story. He stated that an opinion is what a person concludes depending on findings, experience and the area of expertise, and other experts can The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of2079 PR form a contrary opinion on the same facts. His opinion was that the cause of death was traumatic haemorrhage, showed by the left orbital area which had the injury which caused bruising. He stated that injuries from a fall will show on the part or side of the fall. There was injury causing bleeding into the subdural space even though there was no fracture in the skull. There was no fatal result in the liver, but internal organs showed anaemia. The pancreas was not abnormal. Anaemia is not permanent but the heart struggles to In acute anaemia the heart enlarges and pump blood to the rest of the body. there is some swelling in some parts of the body, particularly in the lower parts of the limbs. The deceased did not have acute anaemia. PW3 stated that his opinion was not based on assumptions, but on facts and scientific findings from various tests carried out. The poison tests were carried out in Lilongwe. He was hired by the police who negotiated the standard payment and the witness was not be biased in his findings. 2.3.7. In re-examination, PW3 stated that he could carry out a forensic autopsy without being told any covering story because an autopsy is a process of observing and seeing for oneself. The scientific findings are recorded and an opinion rendered based on the same. 3. Ruling as to whether the accused person had a case to answer the courts can call 3.1. Courts are directed by section 313 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code to assess the evidence at the close of the prosecution case. Following on the assessment, the courts can acquit the accused if it has formed an opinion that no case has been made out against the accused to sufficiently require the the accused to enter his accused to answer. However, defence if it has formed an opinion that a case has been made out against the accused sufficiently to require the accused to answer, see The Republic v Alice Joyce Gwazantini Criminal Case No. 208 of 2003 HC (unreported). The test should be that, based on the evidence on record up to that point, a reasonable tribunal properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence in the case could convict the accused if no explanation was received in defence. 3.2. It was the finding of this Court, at the close of the prosecution case, that a prima to sufficiently facie case has been made out against the accused person, t The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2079 PR require him to enter his defence. The accused person was also informed of his constitutional right to remain silent if he so wished, pursuant to section 42(2)(f) of the Constitution of the Republic of Malawi, 1995. The accused person and his counsel opted to give evidence in his own defence and call witnesses. 4. The Evidence of the Defence 4.1. The accused person gave evidence on his own behalf and he stated that: 4.1.1.0n 20 May 2019 his wife started to drink alcohol around 9:00 a.m. like any other day. She was sick, like every other day, when she drunk alcohol. In the night around 1:30 a.m., the deceased had called to DW1 stating that she wanted to go outside. DW1 called the guard, Mathew to help him.open the doors to her room and they found that she had fallen from the bed and was vomiting. The deceased had been sleeping separately from DW1 because the main bedroom had no Television and no fridge. DW1 and the guard returned the deceased to her bed. The deceased called again around 3:00 they found the a.m. and with the helo of the guard opening the doors, deceased facedown on the floor, vomiting and shivering. Once again, she was placed back onto her bed, after the beddings were changed and DWV1 gave her medication. This was like every day occurrence and she did not become stable after taking medication. Around 6:00 a.m. with the help of the the deceased was dressed and taken to Mwaiwathu maid Happiness, Hospital. Happiness had arrived at 7:00 a.m. from her home as always. The deceased was shivering and vomiting, and was talking gibberish. At the in her examination by the doctor, he said they found only alcohol bloodstream. This is because she was not eating and had no energy, and kept falling every day. The deceased took too much aspirin and medication. 4.1.2.0n admission, a CT Scan was ordered but the deceased was not stable. She was sedated and a brain scan was to be carried out later. She was admitted at the ICU. DWV1 and the maid went home to get essentials. At noon DW1 was informed the brain scan was negative and the hospital was waiting for blood tests. Before the visiting hour of 4:30 p.m., DW1 received a call to go to the hospital where he was informed that his wife had passed on due to a liver disease, pancreas disease, anaemia and septicemia. The Republic v Phillio Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 4.1.3. DW1 told the Court that the deceased ordered him never to cali her family or her son Dan if something goes wrong or if she was sick, but to get the maid and the guard to help. He did not know the reasons, except that there was a problem in the relationships. When she died, he called the mother who did not answer and then her sister in Machinjiri named Beata, and also a friend of the deceased and himself, Mr. Chaponda. A nurse helped DW1 to move the body to the mortuary at Queen Elizabeth Hospital and the nurse called the funeral parlour to transport the body. He was assisted by one relative and Mr. Chaponda. Later, one sister from Lilongwe was with him at the College of Medicine mortuary where the body was left overnight. There were two sisters present at the mortuary, Benadette and Beata. Funeral arrangements were mace for burial at the HHI Cemetary by DW1, Dan, the son of the deceased and one of the sisters Benadette. 4.1.4. DW1 met the deceased in Belgium two years before she returned to in 2014. They had a quiet marriage, but with the problem of alcohol Malawi dependence by the deceased, which was a sickness. Doctors, including Professor Wilima tried to get the deceased to stop but she did not stop. DW1 stated that he closed the Millenium bar in the year 2016 to help the deceased. The doctors allowed the deceased to take a little wine. However, the deceased started taking spirits, sending people to buy for her and hiding the spirits. The deceased was also taking some medications and was not It was hard for DW1 to drinking water or eating properly and had no energy. look after her. Professor Wilima toid the deceased at one point that her liver and pancreas were sick, but there was no medicine for alcohol dependency. DW1 then informed the Court that he was a medical doctor in Belgium for 39 years. 4.1.5. He told the Court that the deceased left a testament she had written in a In the copy book 3 or 4 months before she died, and told him to put away. to take care of her two children Dan testament the deceased asked DW' and Eden and protect her properties. The deceased ended her testament by declaring she had no problem with DW1. DW1 was not present when the testament was written. The deceased had bought her property before they were married and DW1 had nothing to do with her property. The first born g The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2079 PR is in Malawi and the 2nd born son is in Belgium. She had son Dan Khozi some other property in Lilongwe which she sold to build a house in Blantyre. DW1, Dan and any of his relatives were not present when the exhumation was done. DW1 was arrested on Saturday and was informed of the exhumation on Monday. He told the Court that he had no neighbours at that time except Mathew the guard and his deceased wife. He stated that the injuries on her body were due to her constant falls, and that instead of taking one aspirin for her blood pressure she took 5 or 6 aspirins. She was even treated for serious injury following a fall in the bath a year before her death. 4.1.6. In cross examination, he stated that the medical report from Mwaiwathu was genuine and a brain scan was done. The blood results indicated that the liver and pancreas were damaged. His wife told him only to tell issues to her son, the maid and the guard and not her relatives. Since they were married, she visited her mother only twice. He took the deceased to the hospital when It was she was in a bad state after shivering and vomiting the whole night. too much for DW1 and he took her to hospital without informing her family. The deceased had forced DW1 to delete all contact numbers of her family. DW1 only phoned Beata whom the deceased still had a relationship with, but who also had mental problems. DW1 took the testament to the police to show that he was married and that the property was for the sons. DW1 confirmed that his wife was abusing drugs and alcohol, and she used to send other people to buy aspirin for her. DW1 confirmed that he was a former medical doctor. On the night of her sickness, DW1 and the guard were at home, the maid lived elsewhere and reports for work at 7:00 a.m. and the son worked elsewhere during the night and was home from 10 a.m. during the day. DW1 had left for the hospital around 7:00 a.m. and Dan did not come to visit his mother when he returned home because the sicknesses In re-examination he stated that an examination for blood were too much. pressure, blood test and brain scan were done and he was not given the report for the brain scan. 4.2. The second witness for the defence was Mathews Lungu, the guard at the house of the deceased, Eden Lodge. 1 The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 4.2.1. He told the Court that the deceased was sick the whole day on 20 May 2019. The staff were advised to knock off before 4:00 p.m. but he lived on the premises. The deceased slept in a bar while DW1 slept in the bedroom and these were different rooms in different buildings. The deceased was screaming around 1:00 a.m. seeking assistance. She usually screamed to get DW1 to open the doors for her to go to the toilet. DW1 opened his own doors and called DW2 to come inside after he opened the doors of the bar. The deceased was lying face down on the floor and she had wet herself. They put her on the bed. She asked DW/2 to prepare a chamber pot for her. DW1 went to get a mop to clean up. The deceased walked to the bar where there were chairs and she fell bumping her face on the slab around the bar where people rest feet when they are drinking. She fell face up and banged her face on the slab when she rolled over. DW2 helped her to the chair next to the chamber pot but she did not relieve herself and was taken to her bed. She then said she wanted to go the DW1's bedroom to use the toilet there. DW2 took her to DW1's bedroom toilet and she relieved herself. Before she relieved herself, she froze as if something was scaring her, she stared at the roof fearfully and was turning round and round on the spot. She was loosing balance and DW2 had to help her. DW2 took her back to her bed and dressed her in a clean nightdress. DW2 left together with DW1 who locked up the bar. 4.2.2. Early in the morning DW2 heard the deceased screaming again and he in with DW1, and they found her behind the bar counter in her went underwear in a place littered with faeces. She lay on her face and one side was swollen and black. DW1 took tissue and cleaned up the place while DW2 carried the deceased to her bed. By this time the deceased was flopping about and throwing bed covers off herself. DW2's female colleagues, Happiness and Irene, arrived and helped to dress the deceased who was then taken to hospital by DW1 and Happiness. They had gone to the deceased's room twice in the night. The couple loved each other but there were quarrels sometimes. The deceased was a drunkard and was sleeping in the bar where botties of wine and beer were, and she drunk to the point of falling down, and was not in a good mood most of the times. She + The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR took her pills using beer and not water. The deceased had two children, Dan who stayed with them at Eden Lodge and Eden who is in Belgium. 4.2.3. In cross examination, DW1 stated that he was not aware that he had given two different statements. He had mentioned John and Irene at the police station but the police did not write their names in his statement. He stated that what he had stated is what happened. The deceased had fallen and had not hit her face by the forehead but the side of her head but the face was on In re-examination he stated that she had fallen face the floor on the side. down but hit the side of her face on the slab and there was some swelling. At the police station he narrated the events and the police wrote the statement in Chichewa. He noticed some details missing but the police said they do not always write everything. His statement and evidence as given in court was the true statement. 4.2.4.1n response to the Court's question, he described the bar, the room where the deceased slept and the room where the accused person slept. He stated that there are gates to the bar, and in front of the gates is the counter where beer and wine was kept. There is a TV behind the bar. Below the counter, there is a slab which people on the chairs use for putting up their feet. To the is a kitchen. To the right and behind the door left of the counter and behind it, opening rightwards, there was the bed where the deceased slept. The door was behind the gates. There was no other exit and the deceased needed to call for help for anyone to open for her. The doors and gates were locked from outside. He stated that there was Overmeer wine and Malawi gin bottles but most were empty. The deceased and DW' used the bar as their daytime living area as the kitchen and TV were located therein. The bedroom for DW1 was a small hut standing by itself and with a security door iron and clothes for both of them, as well as as well. Inside there was a bed, a toilet and bath. The room was about 8 metres from the bar. The nightdress that DW2 had changed the deceased into was brought in by DW1. He said the main gate was far from the bar but if people were shouting, anyone at the gate would hear. 4.3. The third witness for the defence (DW3) was Happiness Makanjira the maid. The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 4.3.1. She said she reported for work on 20 May 2019 and at around 9:00 a.m. she noticed that DW1 was carrying basin. He told her that the deceased was sick and vomiting. She followed him into the room and saw the deceased vomit at least 5 times. The deceased called DW3 and told her and others to knock off early. At that time the deceased was shaking so much and failing to hold a glass of water and DW1 had to hold it for her. On 21 May 2019 she returned to work. She heard the deceased screaming while she was still at the gate. The guard DW2 told her that the deceased had been screaming the whole night. She went to the room and found her struggling and her legs were down the bed. DW3 asked the deceased what was the problem but she did not answer. DW3 put the deceased back on the bed and left the room. 4.3.2. When DW3 was outside she heard a noise and run back inside the house and found that the deceased had fallen to the floor but her legs were trapped in the security door. DW3 called DW1 and DW2 to help free the deceased and put her back on the bed, The deceased continued struggling and could not be still. DW1 decided to take her to the hospital. At the hospital, DW3 confirmed to the nurses that the deceased smoked and aiso took alcohol. The deceased was taken for a scan but the scan could not be done as the deceased kept struggling and moving about. When DW3 saw the deceased in the admission room, she was tied with ropes on her bed and was not struggling at that time and was not responding to her husband. At knock off time on that day, she was informed that the madam had died. 4.3.3. DW3 worked for the couple from October 2014 to 2020. She said that the deceased slept in the bar and was very fond of taking alcohol that when reporting for duties around 7:00 a.m., she usually found her drunk already. The deceased went to hospital many times on account of alcohol. The deceased had once told DW3 that doctors said that she should stop drinking. The couple's relationship was good, but sometimes they could argue but the accused person used to avoid quarrels by leaving the room and going to bed. While the deceased would sometimes talk because of being drunk and she would forget what she had said. At one time, she hit her husband with a cooking stick and there was a black mark. The next day she asked him what had happened and when he told her she was surprised, and she apologised. i The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR DW3 never saw the deceased being beaten by her husband. Dan, the son of the deceased was partially staying at Eden Lodge. DW3 told the Court that the deceased used to be angry with her husband when he told her family, especially her mother, that she was sick. She used to say that whenever she was sick she did not want her relatives to know. There were some misunderstandings to the point where the deceased refused to allow her mother in the house and DW3 had to serve tea to the mother outside the house. 4.3.4. In cross examination, DV3 explained that the bar had a security door inside and outside. On entering the door, the door inside opens towards the bed at the head-board. The deceased was bruised on the legs when they were pulling her after she had her legs trapped on the bars of the security door. DW3 also noticed that the deceased had a swollen face when she arrived in the morning. There was no re-examination. 4.4. The fourth witness for the defence (DW4) was Dan Khozi, 28 years old, currently staying in Chirimba at Chemusa. 4.4.1. DW4 works as a salesman and the accused person is his step father, who married his mother in 2014. He explained that his usual habit was coming in the morning to take a bath and have breakfast and return to his job. On 20 May 2019, DW4 found his mother vomiting in the morning as was usual. He took a shower, his mother gave him food and he went back to work. The deceased had a drinking habit, but had stopped drinking but she was still vomiting. On 21 May 2019, DW4 returned home and passed the accused person in his car with Happiness and his mum going to hospital, at around 8:00 a.m. By then she had been sick for the whole month and she had been sick that whole night. He was then told on returning home on 22 May 2019 that his mother had passed on in the evening of 21 May 2019. He helped in flowers and also provisions. The funeral the process of buying the coffin, program went weli but later the accused person was arrested. DW4 then stayed at Eden Lodge and not with his grandmother because he did not get along with his mother's family. He said the family issues were that his mum and grandmother had the same character and did not like each other. DW4 The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PA himself had the same character as his mother and they did not get on together sometimes too. 4.4.2. DW4 was aware of the testament that was made by his mother telling the accused to look after everything especially the children. His mother left the Millennium Bar, a plot of land in Chirimba and another place, as well as a garage in Lilongwe. At present DW/4 is managing the properties. DW4 had been living with the accused person since his mother passed on. Their In the last days his relationship was sometimes happy and sometimes not. mother was not strong and was not walking properly. She had problems with her leg and her eye sight was also a problem. She went to the hospital a number of times and doctors said her liver was damaged. He did not visit her at hospital because she went and always came back. 4.4.3. In cross examination, he admitted that he had a history of substance abuse, alcohol abuse and mental health challenges and had to go to a rehabilitation programme. He had been dismissed from work because of the drinking problem and had held a number of jobs. He was arrested for unruly behaviour and unlawful wounding and for reporting false information to a newspaper. He denied to being a violent and mentally unstable person, In re-examination he stated that he because now he takes care of himself. attended a rehabilitation program at St John of God around 2012 and was supported by his aunt, Blandina Khozi Sambo. 4.5. The fifth witness for the defence (DW5) was Professor Jeremiah Wilima, a medical doctor and Director of Mwaiwathu Hospital. 4.5.1. DW5 told the Court that he authored the medical report dated 14 June 2019, which was exhibited and marked as Ex. JW1. DW5 had treated the patient, who had been admitted at the intensive care unit around 9:45 a.m. on 21 May 2019. The histology as received from the husband was that the patient had been confused since the previous night. The patient had been throwing herself on the floor. The patient had also vomited a number of times before admission and had been off alcohol a few days before admission. The patient was reasonably alert on examination and her alertness or lack of it was scored as 12 out of 15 on the Glasgow comma score. Her The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR temperature was normal and she had a swelling around the left eye and forehead, and multiple bruises on the head, hands and legs. 4.5.2. The patient developed a fever and her blood pressure rose to 186/125 but room she was able to breathe normally with an oxygen saturation at temperature of 96% which was very good. The tests showed that her white blood cells were high and tests for two liver enzymes also were elevated and higher than normal. A CT Scan was carried out and it showed that there was soft tissue swelling with scalp haematoma in the frontal region on the left, but there was no evidence of brain injury or fracture of the skull. The cervical spine was normal. On account of the high white cell count and the high temperature, she was commenced on intravenous treatment. She died at 4:58 p.m. There was no chance to request a postmortem but one was carried out afterwards. The clinical cause of death as determined at that point, with no postmortem findings available, was sepsis. DW5 explained that sepsis is a general severe infection. The patient was confused as had been said by the husband but she was able to talk to the nurse with no sensible response hence they depended on the husband narrative. After death there is last office functions done by nursing staff and the witness was not familiar with it. 4.5.3. In Cross examination, DW5 stated that the actual CT scan and brain cervical spine report was not made available to him at the hearing, and he was unable to comment on the same. DW5 had just summarised to the In re-examination, DW5 stated that he Court the report that he had authored. could see the name of the radiologist as Dr Nayak. The witness could not see clearly the report, the date it was authored or could he make out the a CT scan content over the zoom screen. DW5 did confirm to the court that was done on the patient. 4.5.4. In response to the questions by the Court, DW5 explained a number of terms as they relate to the living. The first was haematoma, which he stated was simply a collection of blood outside the vessels as they bleed under the skin and the pooled blood makes a lump. The second was sepsis, which is a it leads infection going about the whole body and when it is severe, general to septicemia, which is a blood born infection. The third terms were in regard The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR to the swelling of the brain which depends on the cause of swelling. is called a haematoma. swelling is due to bleeding in the brain it swelling is not caused by bleeding, but by injury, illnesses like meningitis etc, it is known as oedema. infections and other If the If the 5. The Law 5.1. In any criminal proceedings, the law places the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove all the elements of the offence as charged. Section 187 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code provides that; "(1) The burden of proving any particular fact lies on the person who wishes the court or jury as the case may be to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any written law that the proof of such fact shall lie on any particular person. Provided that subject to any express provision to the contrary in any written law the burden of proving that a person is guilty of an offence lies upon the prosecution" 5.2. The courts have applied this principle religiously, as can be seen from the case of Namondwe v Republic [1993] 16(2) MLR 657 in which Justice Chatsika as he was then, affirmed the views of Lord Sankey in the celebrated case of Woolmington v. Director of Public Prosecution [1935] AC 462, as follows. "tt should be remembered that subject fo any exception at common law, cases of the prosecution bears the burden of insanity and to various statutory provisions, proof on every issue in a criminal case." 5.3. The standard of proof in any criminal matter is proof beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused person If there be caused the death of another person, and with malice aforethought. any doubt as to the guilt of the accused, such doubt should be resolved in favour of the accused person, and the court must subsequently acquit the In Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 327, Lord Denning accused, expounded on another principle as regards the understanding of proof beyond reasonable doubt, stating that; It need not reach certainty, but it must carry a high "That degree is well settled. degree of probability. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond the shadow of a doubt. The law would fail to protect the community if it admitted If the evidence is so strong fanciful possibilities to deflect the course of justice. The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR a man as fo leave only a remote possibility in his favour which can be against dismissed with the sentence. "of course it is possible, but not in the least probable, "the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt but nothing short of that will suffice" 5.4.lndeed the prosecution should never rely on the evidence of the accused person to prove the elements and secure a conviction, see The Republic v Dr. Hastings Kamuzu Banda and Others MSCA Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 1995 (unreported). The court will only consider the evidence of the accused person in so far as the truthfulness of the accused person's story. The accused person simply has to give evidence on a balance of probabilities that their version is true than that given by the prosecution. 5.5. The offence of murder is charged under section 209 of the Penal Code, which provides as follows: "Any person who of malice aforethought causes the death of another person by an unlawful act or omission shall be guilty of murder'. From the section as quoted, the elements of the offence of murder are that; a. b. c. d. death of a person must occur the accused person is the one that caused such death the accused person so caused the death with malice aforethought The death is caused by an unlawful act or unlawful omission Murder is a capital offence and to secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove each and every element of the offence, that there was a death, that the death was caused by the unlawful act or omission of the accused person, and that the accused person had the intention to cause the death 5.6. The requisite mens rea for committing murder is malice aforethought and this has been defined in section 212 of the Penal Code, which provides as follows: "Malice aforethought shall be deemed to be established by evidence proving any one or more of the following circumstances; (a) an intention to cause the death of or to do grievous harm to any person, whether such person is the person actually killed or not; (b) knowledge that the act or omission causing death will probably cause the death of or grievous harm to some person, whether such person is the person actually killed or not, although such knowledge is accompanied by indifference The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2079 PR whether death or grievous bodily harm is caused or not, or by a wish that it may not be caused; (c) an intent to commit a felony; (d) an intention by the act or omission to facilitate the flight or escape from custody of any person who has committed or attempted to commit a felony" 6. Court's determination 6.1. It is not disputed in this Court that Mrs Elizabeth Betty Khozi-Voets died. That life is lost and cannot be brought back. She died a very lonely and painful death without the care and support of the people who should have cared; her family and the accused person included. May her soul rest in eternal peace. 6.2. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was assaulted by the accused person and that the deceased died while receiving treatment. The prosecution alleged that the deceased's death was not natural as the deceased had suffered leading to bleeding in the sub-dural cavity, thereby causing trauma to her head, death. This is reflected in the autopsy report exhibited and marked as Ex. CD1. The accused person denies causing any trauma due to any assault, but states that the deceased had been falling over and that the deceased had died of sepsis as shown by the medical report exhibited and marked as Ex. It must be remembered that the deceased was being buried having died of sepsis, it was the observance of the based on the clinical cause of death. However, swelling on her eye and forehead by the relatives and the stories by people in the neighbourhood that there was a fight that caused the call for the exhumation and for the forensic autopsy to be carried out. This Court notes that while the evidence of purported people who heard sounds of crying and concluded that there was a fidget was not called in, the evidence of DW2 and DW3 shows that when a person is screaming or talking in a loud voice at the bar, the noise can be heard from the gate, thereby lending credence to the assertion of screaming being heard. JW1. 6.3.lt must be acknowledged that both the medical health report and the autopsy report revealed and ascribed ill health to the deceased on account of the abnormal readings from liver function, and the observed fatty changes in the liver due to alcoholism. Both reports found and recorded injuries on the body of The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR in particular the injury to the eye and haematoma or swelling in the deceased, the subdural cavity as well as bruises on the body of the deceased. Both reports stated clearly that there was no brain injury or any fracture to the skull. The reports differ on the cause of death. The medical report stated the clinical cause of death as sepsis because at that time a post-mortem report was not available. According to the evidence of DW5, sepsis was the clinical cause of death because of the heightened temperature the deceased had developed prior to her death. This means that had the hospital carried out a post-mortem the real cause of death would have been determined with examination, certainty. The autopsy report stated that death was caused by bleeding in the head which resulted from trauma. 6.4. The forensic autopsy report further stated that trauma could be due to assault, a fail or a motor vehicle accident. The findings proceeded to discount the trauma being caused by a motor vehicle or a fall. The pertinent finding is quoted here: "Such trauma from a fall usually involves injuries on one side of the body, the side on which the subject fell. However, when injuries on the body surface are (that is: not confined to one side of the body) the on both sides of the body, likelihood of a fall is minimised and that of assault heightened. Additionally the isolated nature of fresh injury fo the head in this case, with parts of the head is significant especially and the rest of the body spared of these fresh injuries, In a fall the tissues covering the bony injury in this case. since it is a fafal orbital rims are often torn, with the skin covering the cheekbones and the lower jaw also torn. A fall from a standing position can result in extensive lacerations of these prominences. This pattern is to be compared with that scene in a fist fight where recessed parts of the face are injured, for example by direct impact to the orbit resulting in the subconjunctival haemorrhage and is a 'black eye', as was seen in this particular forensic autopsy case. therefore my opinion that the injuries seen on the late Elizabeth Khozi Voets' body are mostly likely due to assault fo the head with blunt instruments (including a fist in a fist-fight rather than a fall (suicidal or otherwise)". If 6.5. In their submission, the defence have argued that the prosecution has relied on the autopsy report and the evidence of PW3 that the deceased died due to assault with a blunt object and brain injury, but the prosecution has failed to bring the blunt object, nor to explain the circumstances under which the blunt object was used. As can be seen from the quoted passage above, the cause of trauma was blunt instruments including a fist. Indeed DW' and DWV2 explain in The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR their evidence that during the night they both visited the deceased together and were in each other's sight. This however is not true because in some instances In such a DW1 was elsewhere when the deceased was left in the care of DW2. it cannot be discounted that there were circumstances when DW' Indeed the evidence of DW3 scenario, would have been left alone with the deceased. does show that when she arrived, the deceased was not cared for by either DW1 or DW2 and was screaming ail by herself, meaning that there was no continuous looking after of the deceased by DW1 in the company of DW2. if anything, the evidence of DW1 and DW2 clearly shows that any one of these two persons would have been alone with the deceased and any one of them could have dealt the fatal blow. However, one would have to look at the motive to establish which one of these two would have dealt the fatal blow. 6.6. The evidence of DW' Is silent on the black eye or swelling forehead that was on the body of the deceased. DW1 chose to recount an old injury from a previous year and insisted that any injuries on the deceased were due to her continuous falls because of being drunk and weak. DW2 and DW3 did mention finding the deceased with a swelling on the eye and face. The crucial evidence on any is that of DW2, who described the fall of the deceased on the serious fall concrete slab the first time he visited her in the night. The deceased had fallen In the second visit, face up and rolled to her side and hit the side of her face. DW/2 says he found the deceased in her underwear behind the bar lying face down and with one side of her face swollen. In accordance to the autopsy report such a fall as described by DW2 would show injury on the back of the head, the jaw and the outward skin and the skin over the eye orbital would have shown injury. This was not the case. The deceased's injury was directed in the recess of the orbital, on the eye which as the pictures show, was very black. That is an injury that does not come by a fall as described by DW2. 6.7. This leads the Court to conclude and agree with the scientific finding in the that the injury suffered by the autopsy report exhibited and marked as CD1, deceased was not due to a fail, but was due to a traumatic application of force to the eye/orbital recess. The body of the deceased did tell a tale indeed. The allegation that PW3 carried out the autopsy in the absence of the accused person or the son of the deceased, thereby making his autopsy finding suspect u The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR is a far fetched claim. The fact that PW3 was hired to carry out the forensic autopsy does not mean that the findings were a sham because his finding were also observed on the medical report by DW5. The only difference is that an extensive autopsy was carried out while the hospital only stopped at clinical cause of death. The findings of PW3 were not suspicions or assumptions as counsel for the accused put it. These were scientific findings, which this Court has been persuaded by, bearing in mind that there is no scientific differences between the medical report and the autopsy report as regards the injury to the eye. 6.8. The defence has insisted that the evidence of the State does not show the link in particular how the between the cause of death and the accused person, accused person used a blunt instrument to cause injury to his wife. On the face of it, there is no direct evidence to show how the fatal blow was administered In the absence of direct evidence, the either by a blunt instrument or a fist. is called upon to consider circumstantial evidence. Regarding Court circumstantial evidence the Supreme Court in the case of Viyaviya v The Republic [2002-2003] MLR 423 (SCA), discussed it in the following words: that "We must point out that the law regarding circumstantial evidence in our criminal jurisdiction is now well settled as evidenced by numerous case authorities resting with the decision of this Court in the case of Reuben Stenala Namame and another v The Republic MSCA Criminal Appeal No. 7 law is as follows: where the evidence is of 1994. Shortly stated, circumstantial the accepted and logical approach is by way of elimination that In order to justify from is by negative all possible hypothesis of innocence. circumstantial evidence, an inference of guilt, the facts must be incompatible with the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation upon any other reasonable hypothesis than that of his guilt. A court of law can only convict an accused person if one inference and one inference only, Is possible. Where several in the innocence and others consistent with guilt, absence of any other evidence, to choose the inferences consistent with guilt and to reject inferences consistent with innocence". it is not open to a court, inferences are open, some consistent with 6.9. There are a number of issues in the evidence that shows that the accused person dealt an injury to his wife sometime between 4:00 p.m. on 20 May 2019 and 6:00 a.m. on 21 May 2019. First, the deceased has attempted to show that The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR In his evidence the injuries were due to the fails due to the sickness of his wife. he has even stated that the cause of death was liver disease, pancreas disease, anaemia and septicaemia. He even told this Court that doctors told him that his wife's blood was just alcohol! This of course is not the cause of death by the medical report or the autopsy report. Why would the accused person, who was insist on such who it was clearly reduced in a a medical doctor for 39 years, is in his evidence that the medical report that death was due to sepsis? It sickness of his wife was too much for him and she was sick for a long time. Since he was giving evidence to rebutt the fact that death was due to trauma, reports on the other the failure by the accused person to tender medical illnesses and hospital visits brings into question that the deceased was really sick and constantly at hospital due to her drinking and failure of internal organs. There is no clear medical history being brought as part of the evidence to show that the deceased had been properly diagnosed on these diseases. DW5, who was purported to be the main doctor for the deceased only explained the treatment on the 21 May 2019, stating that he may have seen her on a number of occasions, but he did not elaborate on any chronic illness. 6.10. What the Court concludes here is that the accused person presented his wife as being alcohol dependent, which she was, and he blamed ail her woes on alcoholism, but he never sought serious help for his wife. Because of his narrative, no-one ever took the deceased seriously when she fell sick in the month of May 2019 and indeed on 20 May 2019. The narrative of the accused person prevented the deceased from seeking or being granted the help she In the process, even if the accused person hit or injured the seriously needed. deceased, no-one would believe her complaints because the story line was she constantly fell due to being drunk. 6.11. Secondly, it is very suspect that on this particular night, the accused person It is sought the help of DW2 to open for his wife when she screamed for help. the evidence of DW2 that she used to scream for help when she wanted to go to the toilet that was in the accused person's bedroom but there is nothing in DW2's evidence that he was involved in the opening process in those other days. So why this particular night? Why did the accused person want company when he was caring for his loving wife? in the absence of direct evidence of The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR inflicting a blow to the deceased, this conduct of the accused person leads to the conclusion that something had happened, and he was ensuring that he has other persons to support his narrative. This is more so when one looks to the evidence that before the family of the deceased was informed of her death, the accused person had the body of the deceased embalmed and encased in a coffin ready for burial, without the last viewing of the body. 6.12. Thirdly, the conduct of the accused person by his own evidence, showed serious negligence and omission to do the right thing, and thereby raised doubts to the truthfulness of the evidence of the accused person. The negligence of the accused person in this case led to the omission of seeking medical attention on the evidence of DW5 stated that the time. Starting with the medical report, deceased had been off alcohol for 2 days before admission, and this was the information given to the hospital by the accused person himself. This fact of not drinking was also mentioned in the evidence of DW4. This clearly shows that the claim by the accused person that the deceased was sick because she was is untrue for this particular episode of illness. The evidence drinking as usual illness as diagnosed by the tendered by the defence supports the issue of hospital. The deceased had been vomiting and shivering for at least 48 hours and ended up being delirious. The evidence of DW3 shows that at least on 20 May 2019 the deceased had vomited 5 times in the presence of DW3 and was shaking so much that she would not hold a glass of water. 6.13. Further, it is the evidence of the accused person that the deceased insisted that when she was sick the maid and househelp should help him and not the deceased's family. So it is incomprehensible that faced with such serious illness when the deceased had not been drinking for two days, the househelp would be requested to leave earlier than their knock off time. This Court concludes that the attempts by the accused person to have this Court believe that he cared for the deceased really fall short because as a former medical doctor he should have known better that a person who abuses alcohol should be fully treated as a sick person and they need family support. Locking her up in a bar where alcohol was stored shows the uncaring nature of the accused person, bearing in mind the evidence of DW2 that some of the bottles of Malawi gin and also The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR Overmeer wine had alcohol wife to continue to be drunk and slowly let her life ebb away. in them. It is as if the accused person desired his 6.14. Fourthly, the general care for the deceased during her illness showed gross negligence and calculated instances of indifference and cruelty. The evidence of DW3, the only witness who stated so, shows that the deceased had fallen off a bed and had her legs caught in the grill door. However, both DW1 and DW2 who placed themselves as the main caregivers did not explain these bruises, nor the fact that the deceased had been trapped between the doors and the headboard. This particular evidence would have been brought in by DW3 for purposes of in the eyes of the explaining the bruises on the legs of the deceased. However, Court, this evidence shows the acute negligence by the accused person in the care of Mrs Elizabeth Betty Khozi-Voets. By his own account, the deceased was sick, she was confused, she had been vomiting continuously and she was soiling herself. According to DW4, the deceased was sick the whole month May the other witnesses DW1, DW2, and DW3 the 2019, and according to all deceased had been sick and vomiting the whole day and night of 20 May 2019. All the evidence clearly shows that the deceased needed medical attention and constant care. 6.15. The deceased's cries for help throughout the night showed that she was in pain, was becoming delirious and confused. DW2 stated that when he went the second time to the bar, the deceased was like hiding behind the bar, derilious, undress and confused. DW3 walked through the gate to the screaming of the deceased at 7:30 a.m. on 21 May 2019. There is no evidence of caring for the deceased by the accused person, who seemed to have given up on the In any ordinary person's mind, the deceased was not a person who deceased. If anything she should could be locked up in a room to spend a night alone. the accused have been taken to hospital on 20 May 2019, and in the least, person would have spend the night by her side instead of locking her up. The accused person stated that the deceased prohibited him to contact her family but only rely on the maid and househelp. He even stated that she had forced him to delete all contact numbers for the family. 6.16. This Court finds this hard to believe, bearing in mind that after the passing of the the deceased, after embalming and encasing her remains in a coffin, The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2079 PR accused person did try to call the mother of the deceased. This means that he had the contact numbers but chose not to contact them despite being faced with acute illness and the subsequent death of his wife. Therefore, the claim that the is also a motive that he sickness and caring for his wife was too much for him, wanted this to come to an end. Her death amid such negligence and omission to take reasonable action by a former medical doctor, did in fact put an end to the need for caring. 6.17. Fifthly, there is the issue of the testament, which the accused person seemed to have prioritised since the time he was arrested. The accused person told this Court that the undated testament was written some {3 or 4 months prior to the death of the deceased, and the deceased asked her tout it away. Anyone else only became aware of it when she passed on. The alleged testament reads as follows: "God permitted me to say wronged a lot of souls and people and those who wronged me and those / wronged. was sent to wright the wrongs of the world l was loved by my dear Phillip who will look that's only a dream am not sad, loved you a fot. Darling after all have especially the kids. God bless you, Jeremy look after papa. Eddie you are a shining star, Dan there's potential, Bye. Elizabeth Voets. love you aif" 6.18. PW1 told the court that knowing her sister, this alleged testament seemed to have been written under duress and the handwriting was illegible. This Court agrees with that observation to the extent that the alleged testament reads as a note being written by someone who is facing immediate death. Its a confession of some sort. The scrap copy book in which it was written had some entries on some building project in June 2017 entered by the accused person and at the back was some stock entries of beers and spirits written by someone else. Furthermore, the accused person insisted that the alleged testament was meant to have him look after the property on behalf of the children. When the accused it was based on the fact that person applied for variation for his bail conditions, he had found a place for himself and he was going to hand over the property to the children, yet there was no legal evidence supporting that handover. The conduct of the accused person as regards the alleged testament and the property of the deceased was indeed suspicious and could easily supply the motive for the murder of the deceased. The Republic v Phillip Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR 7. Conclusion 7.1. The evidence of the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased shows that there was grave omission to do the right thing and acute negligence on the part of the accused person who is a trained medical doctor. Such omission lead to the commission of the offence of murder. The evidence shows that the accused person peddled a narrative as regards the illness of his wife, which narrative led to the deceased person not receiving care from her relatives and proper medical attention from doctors. 7.2. The defence argues that the allegation of assault was not corroborated by the prosecution in any way. Circumstantial evidence is acceptable evidence that leads to conviction when the circumstantial evidence meet the established standards of proof, which is proof beyond reasonable doubt. Circumstantial evidence is not expected to be corroborated and the guilt of an accused person may be established by circumstantial evidence, see Chidothi and another v Rep (1992) 15 MLR 51. 7.3. While there is no direct evidence of the fist or blunt instrument that caused the traumatic injury to the deceased, which injury caused her death, circumstances show that the accused person had motive and opportunity to inflict such injury unobserved. The circumstances also shows that he contrived to get evidence from those whom he had employed to support his narrative of drunkenness and ill health which was not supported by medical reports as the the cause of death. 7.4. Looking at all the circumstantial evidence, there are no several inferences that are open to this Court. Whichever way one looks at this matter, and with the drive to have the property of the deceased, the accused person systematically acted in a way that lead to the death of his wife: by inflicting the traumatic blow and by negligently omitting to take proper care of her, which both led to her death. These two, the action and the omission, were the actus reus of this crime. 7.5. In all this, what this court cannot get over is the fact that a person who Is so sick as the deceased was, would be locked up from outside the room without a chance or choice to get out and seek their own help. The indignity of having a The Republic v Phillfo Voets Homicide Case No.63 of 2019 PR male employee witness your struggles while in such a very vulnerable position is painful to perceive. That is cruelty beyond imagination. That does not show to demean and to cause love at all, but a calculated move to dehumanise, humiliation to the extreme. That is an unlawful omission and in that process death occurred and the accused person is held liable for that death. 7.6.|t is the finding of this Court that the State has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused person Phillip Voets, caused the death of his wife Elizabeth Betty Khozi-Voets. The accused person is therefore found guilty as charged and is convicted of the offence of murder. Pronounced in OPEN COURT at PRINCIPAL REGISTRY this 13th day of May 2021 D. A. BéGabriele JUDGE 28