S v Mesho (CC 4 of 2018) [2022] NAHCNLD 109 (13 October 2022)

S v Mesho (CC 4 of 2018) [2022] NAHCNLD 109 (13 October 2022)

The accused's defence of temporary non-pathological incapacity was rejected as false beyond reasonable doubt due to lack of supporting evidence and the proven facts indicating calculated, controlled, and targeted conduct. The accused acted with direct intent in the murders and had criminal capacity at the time of the offences.

Citation
[2022] NAHCNLD 109
Parties
Prosecution: The State; Accused: Patrick Shuya Mesho
Court
Northern Local Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
13 October 2022
Case Number
CC 4 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Conviction on two counts of murder with direct intent, conviction on competent verdicts of assault (by threat) and assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm on counts 3 and 4, respectively.
Legal Topics
Murder, Attempted Murder, Assault, Criminal Capacity, Intoxication, Non Pathological Insanity, Domestic Violence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Murder Attempted Murder Assault Criminal Capacity Intoxication Non Pathological Insanity Domestic Violence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Prosecution

Patrick Shuya Mesho

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused had criminal capacity at the time of the offences due to alleged temporary non-pathological insanity from emotional stress and intoxication
  2. 2 Whether the accused acted with direct intent in committing the offences

Ratio Decidendi

The accused's defence of temporary non-pathological incapacity was rejected as false beyond reasonable doubt due to lack of supporting evidence and the proven facts indicating calculated, controlled, and targeted conduct. The accused acted with direct intent in the murders and had criminal capacity at the time of the offences.

Court Disposition

Conviction on two counts of murder with direct intent, conviction on competent verdicts of assault (by threat) and assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm on counts 3 and 4, respectively.

Orders

  • Count 1: Guilty of murder with direct intent (read with the provisions of the Combating of Domestic Violence Act 4 of 2003).
  • Count 2: Guilty of murder with direct intent.