Maseru, Mar. 12—-Mots’elisi Maoeng who was employed as a domestic worker by the Sekokotoana family at Ha Leqele in Maseru together with her boyfriend John Lefoka were on Thursday found guilty of the murder of Liteboho Sekokotoana (8 years) which occurred on April 07 2025 at his home.
The duo was also found guilty of theft as they stole properties belonging to Maoeng’s employers, also the parents of the deceased ‘Malithakong and Lillo Sekokotoana. They were further convicted of the assault of the deceased’s brother Lereko Sekokotoana (15 years) which occurred on the same day.
When delivering his judgment, Justice Ts’eliso Mokoko stated that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused. He indicated that it is clear that the accused shared common purpose and intention as they acted together when they committed the offences.
“The court is of the view that, when they wrapped the deceased with the sellotape, they foresaw the risk of death occurring, but they recklessly continued and gambled with the life of the deceased”, said the judge.
Evidence by a Forensic Pathologist Dr. Lefatle Phakoana revealed that the cause of death of the deceased was suffocation which he called asphyxia due to smothering.
The accused exercised their right to remain silent by opting not to take the stand and closed their case after the prosecution closed theirs.
When addressing the court in arguments last week, a prosecutor in this matter Advocate Thato Lepheana stated that the accused have a duty to present their defence but they failed to put their defence to the state witnesses. She submitted that the prosecution provided sufficient evidence to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
“The accused intentionally and negligently got intoxicated then committed the offences they are charged with. They therefore cannot raise the defence of intoxication”, she argued.
She said they were fully aware and appreciative of what they were doing, adding that they should not be excused from punishment on the basis of intoxication. She emphasised that voluntary intoxication should not be considered as a defence.
Adv.Pelele Ntori, one of the defence lawyers representing Maoeng stated that the accused should be found guilty of culpable homicide, assault and theft not murder, attempted murder and theft as charged.
He argued that the onus to prove the case lies with the prosecution adding that the accused are not obliged to give an explanation. He indicated that the judgment of the accused was impaired by intoxication. He added that they did not have direct intention to kill the deceased.
Adv. Ntori however acknowledged that the accused were acting in common purpose. He thus said he would admit dolus eventualis.
Adv. Nketsi Makhera, who is representing Lefoka, submitted that the accused did not plan to kill the deceased. He pointed out that their only intention was to steal therefore they should be found guilty on dolus eventualis.
He emphasised that the accused have the right to keep silent adding that silence does not mean admission of guilt.
Ends/SM/BM
