Zimbabwe High Court: Charlotte Choto Murder Conviction, Constructive Intent

• Charlotte Choto received a 20-year prison sentence for the murder of her lover, Jehu Rubaba, in Zimbabwe.
• The Zimbabwe High Court murder conviction was for murder with constructive intent and aggravating circumstances, stemming from a dispute over food.
• Justice Catherine Bachi Mzawazi rejected Choto's self-defence claim, finding she continued strangulation after Rubaba was helpless.
• Choto's actions after the strangulation, including further assaults and inconsistent statements to police, contributed to the murder aggravating circumstances.
• The court emphasized that Choto should have foreseen death from prolonged strangulation, even without deliberate intent to kill.

The court determined that while the State could not prove Choto deliberately planned to kill Rubaba, she should have reasonably foreseen that her prolonged strangulation would result in death.

Charlotte Choto, a 39-year-old woman, has been sentenced to 20 years in prison by the Zimbabwe High Court following her conviction for the murder of her lover, Jehu Rubaba. The tragic incident, which occurred on December 27, 2025, at their Domboramwari home in Epworth, Harare, stemmed from a domestic dispute over a meal. Rubaba, having returned home after consuming alcohol, expressed dissatisfaction upon finding his family eating chicken and rice, as he preferred sadza after drinking.

The disagreement escalated when Choto objected to Rubaba's attempt to prepare sadza for himself. This initial argument quickly intensified, moving into the couple's bedroom where the confrontation turned violent behind closed doors. Choto later claimed that Rubaba initiated the physical altercation, stating he threw a punch that missed and shattered a window before grabbing her by the throat. In response, she asserted that she acted in self-defense, grabbing the hood of his jacket from behind and using it to strangle him.

However, the court, presided over by Justice Catherine Bachi Mzawazi, thoroughly dismissed Choto's self-defense narrative. The Zimbabwe High Court murder conviction hinged on the finding that Choto continued to choke Rubaba even after he had become incapacitated. Justice Mzawazi pointedly questioned why Choto did not release her grip when Rubaba showed clear signs of collapse, such as soiling himself. The judge concluded that maintaining strangulation to the point of breaking an adult male's neck constituted force that was disproportionate to any perceived threat. This self-defence rejection domestic violence case highlighted the stringent requirements for such a claim.

Further exacerbating the situation, Choto continued her assault on Rubaba after he had collapsed, inflicting injuries to his inner thighs and testicles using her hands and a broken metal key handle. The scene, later investigated by police, revealed Rubaba's decomposing body in a pool of blood, with scratch marks on the floor indicating a desperate struggle. Following the death, Choto's actions were highly disturbing: she allegedly summoned her three children to witness the aftermath, cleaned the soiled room with the deceased's clothes, bathed, changed, and washed her blood-stained attire, then slept in another room, leaving Rubaba's body. She subsequently spent an entire day visiting a friend with her children before finally reporting the death to the police on December 29, initially falsely claiming Rubaba had returned home injured from a beer hall.

The Justice Catherine Bachi Mzawazi ruling ultimately found Choto guilty of Charlotte Choto murder constructive intent Zimbabwe under murder aggravating circumstances Zimbabwe. The court determined that while the State could not prove Choto deliberately planned to kill Rubaba, she should have reasonably foreseen that her prolonged strangulation would result in death. The additional assaults on an already helpless Jehu Rubaba strangulation case victim were deemed to be torture and degrading treatment, thus establishing the aggravating circumstances. The judge also noted the significant impact of Choto's inconsistent statements criminal defence, finding her confirmed police confession more credible than her varying defense accounts.

In delivering the 20-year prison sentence, Justice Mzawazi underscored the tragic nature of the case, describing it as a stark illustration of domestic violence escalating to fatal consequences over an easily avoidable disagreement. The judge remarked that a precious life was needlessly lost over a meal, emphasizing how the violence progressed from a refusal to prepare food, to preventing Rubaba from cooking, to insults, physical dragging, and ultimately, a fatal fight. The court highlighted that the entire altercation could have been averted had either party simply walked away, reinforcing the gravity of the domestic violence context.

This High Court ruling provides a critical precedent on the interpretation of 'murder with constructive intent' and the stringent requirements for successful self-defence claims in Zimbabwe, particularly when the accused's actions continue after the victim is incapacitated. Lawyers defending or prosecuting similar domestic violence cases must meticulously assess the proportionality of force and the impact of inconsistent client statements on credibility.

Source: Reporting based on court records.