The Durban High Court dismissed the appeal against both conviction and sentence lodged by Sphamandla ‘Chilies’ Gumede, 31, who was found guilty of the brutal murder of five people at the Uganda informal settlement in Umlazi.
Gumede argued that there was insufficient evidence to prove he had committed the murders. His sentence includes five life imprisonment terms, 15 years for each of the two counts of robbery with aggravating circumstances, and 10 years imprisonment for attempted murder.
In November 2023, Gumede shot and killed Nontlomelo Golumbiza, Nandipha Ndabeni, Nkosinathi Phutheni, Cebolenkosi Mbuzeleni Zwane, and Mabongi Nkwanyana. Ntobeko Mantegu survived after being shot and robbed of his cellphone. Gumede took a television and cellphones from Golumbiza’s home, which she shared with her cousin Ndabeni.
After Judge Rithy Singh sentenced Gumede and declared him unfit to possess a firearm, his lawyer, T Mthembu, told the court that he had been instructed to appeal the sentence and conviction.
“The accused says the State failed to prove its case in respect of count 1-5 (all five murders),” Mthembu explained.
Additionally, he said his client claims that there was no evidence that he was the one who shot and killed all the victims because the murder weapon has not been found.
“Where was he expecting the firearm to be found, because when he was charged with this case, he was already incarcerated?” Judge Singh asked.
Mthembu said his client maintained that.
State prosecutor advocate Gugu Xulu opposed Gumede’s leave to appeal, stating that no other court would impose a different sentence.
“This court looked at all aspects,” she said.
Judge Singh said the court was clear in its judgment that Gumede was convicted because of independent evidence introduced during the trial.
“In respect of the sentence, the applicant (Gumede) apologised for his behaviour (in court).”
She said Gumede did not advance any reasons that there were compelling circumstances for the court to deviate from minimum sentences. This is because Gumede refused to instruct Mthembu on mitigation of the sentence. He also refused to participate when social workers were asked to prepare his pre-sentence report.
“No other court would come to a different conclusion in respect of the conviction and sentence,” Judge Singh said, dismissing the leave to appeal application.
Gumede, who had previously shown defiance when Judge Singh delivered the guilty verdict in August, refused to accept it and became argumentative while addressing the judge.
Prior to the formal appeal being raised after his sentence, Gumede repeatedly raised his hand, demanding to address the court.
However, Judge Singh denied his requests, instructing Mthembu to speak on his behalf after a brief consultation.
“He wants to tender an apology to the court for his behaviour. He was shocked by the verdict. He humbly requests that he wants to stand, talk with his mouth and apologise,” Mthembu informed the court.
“This court accepts his apology,” Judge Singh responded, thereby rejecting Gumede’s personal request to speak.
