A TEENAGER who raped an 83-year-old granny has told a court that he “just felt like doing it”.

Sikhumbuzo Gumede, 18, of Mawuwini Village in Nkayi, was beginning a 15-year jail term on Wednesday after pleading guilty to the violent sex attack.

A Bulawayo court heard how the victim bravely tried to fight off Gumede, her screams finally attracting a passer-by whose arrival at the scene forced the teenager to flee.

Before passing sentence, magistrate Godwin Sengweni asked if Gumede had an explanation for his actions.

“I still don’t understand why I did it. I just felt like doing it,” he replied.

The magistrate sentenced Gumede to 20 years in jail, but conditionally suspended five years after crediting him for his guilty plea and the fact that he was a youthful offender.

The magistrate said: “What aggravates your actions is that you raped an 83-year-old woman and subjected her to a horrific experience.

“The court will suspended a portion of the sentence to allow you a chance to live a crime-free life after you are released from prison.”

Blessing Kudhlande, prosecuting, told the court that Gumede was walking home from Nkayi business centre just after 4PM on July 4 this month when he came across the victim walking in the opposite direction.

Gumede, the court heard, offered the victim a 2kg packet of sugar which he was carrying, but she had declined.

“Gumede blocked her way, grabbed her by the hand and dragged her into the bush,” Kudhlande told the court.

A few metres from the footpath, Gumede ordered the elderly woman to lie down, but she picked up a log and tried to strike him. He ducked and eventually overpowered her, the court heard.

During the attack, the court heard, Gumede threatened to kill her if she did not stop resisting and screaming.

“The victim bravely fought Gumede and told her she would rather die than be violated,” the prosecutor said.

The victim’s screams attracted a passer-by who came to her rescue. Gumede was arrested hours later.

newszimbabwe

The Urgency of Obedience

Although Satan is “the god of this age” (2 Cor. 4:4), he does not have carte blanche to afflict God’s people. The more precisely we as believers obey God, the more difficult it is for the Devil to succeed in ruining our lives. Sections of Scripture like Psalm 91 make it plain that the effectiveness of God’s protection of us is in large part proportional to our “dwelling in the secret place of the Most High” and “abiding in the shadow of the Almighty.”

Satan tries to trick us into sinning (disobeying God) and by doing so leaving the umbrella of God’s “protective custody.” For example, when Satan was tempting Jesus in the wilderness, he twisted God’s Word. By misapplying Psalm 91:12, he tried to get Jesus to do something dangerous and foolhardy that would have cost him his life. He wanted Jesus to mistakenly believe that God’s protection of him was absolute, when it was actually relative to his faith in and obedience to God’s Word. Nowhere does God guarantee blanket protection to Temple-jumpers.

If Jesus needed to remain in the will of God to assure himself of protection, surely we do too. Sin in the life of a Christian is a primary cause of his vulnerability to spiritual defeat. If Satan can get a believer to act contrary to the will of God, it appears that this gives him an opportunity to step in and afflict him.

Satan carefully chooses his moments to strike, in accord with his goal to confuse people as to the difference between good and evil. He does not take advantage of all sin to correspondingly afflict each person who sins, because then he would eventually discourage sin, and his success depends upon encouraging it. He does take special pleasure in hurting God’s people in order to make it seem that commitment to God does not result in blessings.

God does not kill people who love Him, or cause them to suffer. It is the Devil who causes death and suffering. God is righteous and just. If a parent, judge, schoolteacher, etc. were to act as God is portrayed by many as acting — punishing one person while letting another go free for the same sin — imagine the din of angry voices shouting “Unfair! Unfair!” And it would be unfair.

It is interesting that most Christians who write about suffering admit that it is unfair, or at least that it seems unfair. But their erroneous belief that God is the cause of the suffering necessitates a distorted rationale. Not wanting to point an accusing finger at God, a finger they would unhesitatingly and rightly point at people, i.e., Stalin, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Snidely Whiplash and other perpetrators of heinous crimes, they are forced to say that “unfair” is really “fair” after all.

Philip Yancey’s comment is representative of the confusion that exists concerning God’s fairness:

If, for the sake of a “test” of love, a husband subjected his wife to the trauma that Job had to endure, we would call him pathological and lock him away. If a mother hid herself from her children…we would judge her an unfit mother. How, then, can we understand such behavior…by God Himself? I offer no neat formula…[1]

The Word of God makes it plain that applying such a double standard to Him is unwarranted, since He is the epitome of a loving Father.

By doing things like afflicting some people who sin, and disregarding others, the Devil has confused multitudes. In Old Testament times, this confusion contributed to what came to be the popular belief that God, if He did not choose to punish someone for his sin, would instead punish the person’s descendants. Job refers to this belief in his great speech in Chapter 21: “It is said, ‘God stores up a man’s punishment for his sons’” (Job 21:19a). Recognizing that punishing children for a parent’s sin while letting the parent go free is not justice, Job continued, “Let him [God] repay the man himself so that he will know it!” (Job 21:19b).

Jeremiah 31:29 and Ezekiel 18:2 also reflect this common belief in biblical times that God punished children for their parents’ sins, as does the verse that we quoted earlier in Chapter One: “Rabbi [Jesus], who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” (John 9:2). This verse shows that even Jesus’ disciples were confused and were considering the possibility that God did punish children for some ancestor’s sin.

Unless one understands the figure of speech Metonymy, it would appear that the Bible does indicate that God punishes children for their parents’ sin. Exodus 20:5 reads, “I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers [ancestors] to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.” But this is a great example of the figure Prophetic Metonymy. God is not actively punishing, instead He is prophetically warning of the consequences of Israel’s disobedience. God does not punish the children of sinners! He even forbids that children be executed for sins they did not commit, as the following verse shows:

Ezekiel 18:20
The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.

It is true that children often do suffer for the sins of their parents, in that such sins often allow Satan the window of opportunity to afflict them. By their sinful behavior, parents can open the lives of their children to the direct influence of evil spirits that cause confusion, sickness and even death. Sometimes the “consequences” children receive are very obviously related to the physical sin of their parents. Fetal-alcohol-syndrome and babies addicted to crack-cocaine are both examples of this. It can be documented that abusive tendencies, alcoholism and other sinful behavior tend to stay in a family for generations. But are these problems acts of God? No! If a mother is a drunk, she is sinning of her own free will. Her fetal-alcohol-syndrome baby is not God’s doing. God is always trying to help and bless people in any way He can.

Again we want to emphasize that suffering or affliction is never, by itself, an accurate gauge of sin in one’s life. The Bible shows that sometimes the righteous suffer while the sinful go free. That is not to imply in any way that there is no value to living a holy life. First, there is a Day of Judgment coming when the Lord Jesus Christ will judge every person according to his or her earthly behavior. Second, and most germane to our thesis, God does work to actively protect those who are trying to serve Him. Throughout the Bible, God is called the believers’ “savior,” “deliverer,” “shield,” “rock,” “fortress,” “stronghold,” “refuge,” “shepherd,” “rearguard,” etc. Although God cannot always totally protect His people from all evil, He is always actively working to “deliver us out of all our troubles” (Ps. 34:17). No doubt every believer can give examples of God’s helping hand on his or her life.

CASE ONE

Dear Taiwo,
I decided to write you because I know you would help proffer solution to my situation.

Taiwo, please, I need help. My husband has killed me! He has committed an abomination and since I learnt his atrocity last week, I have not been myself. “Why did Kingsley do this to me?” That was the question I asked myself.

I have heard a lot about spousal-infidelity, and I have never for one day trusted my husband or fooled myself that he wasn’t engaged in extra-marital affairs, but I was of the opinion that he should cheat on me with an outsider, not my blood sister, who we raised together as our own child.

I was angry when my friend, who I discussed the issue with said she would not blame Kingsley as much as she would blame my sister. Who would I blame now?

Nkem, my sister came to live with us at age of 12 when we got married and she continued her schooling with us in Port Harcourt where we settled. She was a good, obedient, intelligent and loved by all. I have no regrets whatsoever, raising her like my own child.

When we began our life as a couple, things were not rosy immediately, both of us were teachers, but, because we were both determined to make it in life, we were not complacent with where we were.

At a level, we decided that Kingsley should go back to school while I managed the home front with my little salary. To make ends meet, I began trading. I would travel to our village to buy foodstuffs at cheap rates and sell to people in Port Harcourt and make gains. All this time, Kingsley remained a loving husband, but became something else when he started making money.

Our first problem started when I told him of my intentions to go back to school after he had finished schooling. He did not take kindly to the idea, but I stood my grounds; I reminded him of our decision when he was about starting his studies. And to discourage me, Kingsley said he had no money to sponsor my education.

I, however, did not allow this to discourage me, I was determined to go to the university and to the glory of God, I did. After our university education, we both secured good jobs, although he got a job before me and he was making good money before I started making mine, but I never had to wait on him to get or do anything.

I should have known when he suddenly became interested in Nkem after she gained admission into the university; I said this because we both raised her. For someone with good intentions, it shouldn’t be strange, because she was like a sister to him. But my husband had other things on his mind.

Initially, I noticed that he complained about everything my sister did, but I didn’t see anything wrong in that until a friend of mine who had a shop in my sister’s school told me that she always saw my husband coming to pick or visit my sister at odd hours. She didn’t tell me to infuse suspicion in me, but her concern was was my well-being and that of my home.

I was, however, shocked when I asked my sister why my husband was always visiting her in school and she denied. I became concerned, so, I also asked my husband, but he too said it was a lie.

Do you know what it feels like to be made to look like a fool? I really did not know what to make of all these, but I kept praying. My husband, however, started misbehaving after I asked him about my sister.

He would leave the house for days and not come back. My sister visited the house all the time, so I had no cause to suspect that anything was between them or if his absence from the house had anything to do with her, until my encounter with the two of them in town.

Kingsley was away from the house for two weeks, I tried his line several times but he had switched off, I would have gone to check him in the office, but he was on leave. Some of my friends told me they saw him in town, but he did not come home.

Coincidentally, I met him somewhere in town; he was so carried away speaking with his companion in the car that he didn’t see me. I followed the car and crossed him at a convenient place. He had no choice but to stop. I then noticed that the lady at the passenger’s side was trying to hide her face from me.

I had already caused a scene, at that moment; I really didn’t care what happened. I held on to Kingsley’s cloth and asked people who were around to ask the passenger in the car to come down. She was told to come down and when she did, lo and behold, it was my sister.

If she had good intentions, why was she hiding from me? Please, what do I do? What am I to make of all this nonsense? To crown it all, Kingsley has not been home since and my sister has equally refused to come home. Please, help me.

CASE TWO

I have had a 3month relationship with my sister’s husband and I think I might be in love with him. The relationship started when my sister travelled abroad to have her first baby. I was the one taking care of Henry (my sister’s husband) when his wife was absent for so many months.

My little sister (Val) asked me to make sure that her husband was well taken care of in terms of cooking for him and making sure the house and everything else was organised.

While she was gone, I was the one supervising the house chores because I don’t leave too far from them, so every day before and after work, I would visit the house to bring food for him and make sure all was well.

One night after I had prepared dinner for him, Henry asked me to keep him company while he watched a soccer game. I decided to stay because over time we had become such good friends and I was comfortable around him. I was never attracted to him because I knew he was married to my sister, he was like a brother to me.

But on that fateful night, we got talking for hours about many things including his marriage to Val, and he told me that Val’s pregnancy was so hard on her because she was cranky all the time and refused to allow him touch her. Suddenly Henry jumped on me and started professing his love for me, telling me he wanted me so bad and that I would have made a better wife than Val.

One thing led to another and we were having sex on the couch, I felt so bad but I could not resist his pleas, he was like a helpless man begging for attention that he wasn’t getting from his wife. I know I am wrong but I felt he needed love and care.

His wife is still abroad and I have almost moved into the house under the guise that I am cooking and cleaning for him. I and Henry now have sex constantly every night, sometimes he stays over at my place. My parents don’t suspect anything because they believe I am only helping him out in the absence of my sister. But if they knew the truth I would die!

I am in love with Henry and he says he loves me too but he is married to my baby sister. I don’t know what to do because I don’t want to lose my sister who is my best friend or my Henry who I love so dearly.

Please what should I do…?

COMMISSIONER STEVEN P. LYNCH

CLERK OF THE COURT S. Gutierrez Deputy

NATALIE BLAIR HUDDLESTON

CLARK L DERRICK

APO-PLEAS-CCC
D & C MATERIALS-CSC

CONTINUANCE

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY

Upon written motion by counsel for the Defense, and good cause appearing based on the following grounds:

For the reasons set forth in the motion,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion for Continuance.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED continuing Sentencing from June 14, 2012 to August 2, 2012, at 9:30 a.m. in this division.

IT IS ORDERED sealing the Motion to Continue Sentencing, Motion for Permission to file Motion to Continue Under Seal, and Order filed June 7, 2012, not to be opened without further order of the Court.

Docket Code 169 Form R176A Page 1

CR2011-141146-004 DT

COMMISSIONER STEVEN P. LYNCH

STATE OF ARIZONA
v.
JAMIE BUSSERETH (004)

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY

PLEA AGREEMENT/CHANGE OF PLEA

1:36 p.m.
Courtroom 1001 – Central Court Building

State’s Attorney: Defendant’s Attorney: Defendant:

the above-named counsel the above-named counsel Present

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court reviews the Plea Agreement with Defendant. The Court advises Defendant of the range of possible sentence and the availability of probation, and any special conditions of sentencing and probation. The Court advises Defendant of all pertinent constitutional rights and rights of review.

Defendant enters a plea of Guilty to the following:

OFFENSE: Count 3 (AMENDED): Possession of Marijuana for Sale
Docket Code 105 Form R105 Page 1

04/06/2012

CLERK OF THE COURT J. Bower
Deputy

NATALIE BLAIR HUDDLESTON

CLARK L DERRICK

APO-PLEAS-CCC
D & C MATERIALS-CSC VICTIM WITNESS DIV-AG-CCC

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY

Class 4 Felony
A.R.S. § 13-3401, 3405, 301, 302, 303, 304, 701, 702, 801, and 811(B) Date of Offense: On or About 08/09/2011
Non Dangerous – Non Repetitive

OFFENSE: Count 5 (AMENDED): Attempted Money Laundering Class 4 Felony
A.R.S. § 13-2301, 2317, 301, 302, 303, 304, 701, 702, 801, and 8011(B) Date of Offense: On or About 08/09/2011

Non Dangerous – Non Repetitive

IT IS ORDERED accepting the plea.

IT IS ORDERED setting time for sentencing on 06/14/2012 at 11:00 a.m. before Comm. Lynch.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following will be deemed submitted at the time of sentencing: Motion To Dismiss Counts 1, 2, and 4 as reflected in the Plea Agreement.

IT IS ORDERED the Adult Probation Department shall prepare a Presentence Report, and that Defendant shall report to the Adult Probation Department if not in custody.

IT IS ORDERED vacating any pending dates.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming prior release orders. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED sealing Exhibit A. FILED/SEALED: Exhibit A
1:45 p.m. Matter concludes.

Stop Harassing J.C. Hutchinson!
Published: Sunday | July 15, 2012 0 Comments
THE EDITOR, Sir:

With regard to The Gleaner’s editorial of Friday, July 13, 2012, titled ‘Apologies welcome, but … ‘, I am surprised at the lack of breadth of knowledge that you display when you do not understand why Raymond Pryce can be legitimately and appropriately called a fish by his senior, J.C. Hutchinson. That is an ancient metaphor in the English language.

Raymond Pryce, a tenderfoot in the House, was being properly reprimanded for his bad behaviour towards an elder in his community. If ‘fish’ is a Jamaican term of abuse used against those in our community who have certain sexual inclinations, this was unknown to me and to everyone that I have asked in my circle of friends and acquaintances.

I am willing to grant Mr Hutchinson the benefit of the doubt, especially seeing that my take on the matter satisfies all the conditions.

Big fish

I think that he meant to say to Mr Pryce, “You are a small fry in this place, I am a big fish. Show respect!” This is an apt reprimand, as the circumstances demonstrate. Mr Hutchinson is no worse than millions of people all over the world in mistakenly characterising, in his explanation, a whale as a fish.

The term ‘small fry’ in The Oxford Dictionary means ‘young or newly hatched fishes … or people of little importance; children’.

It is laudable that The Gleaner has embarked upon a campaign to reduce the discrimination and abuse suffered by those people in our society with minority sexual preferences, but, the motto, ‘Honi soit qui mal y pense’ (Shame on him who suspects illicit motivation), is still relevant, and something to adopt.

You, therefore, are barking up the wrong tree, and there is no need for any apology on Mr Hutchinson’s part.

DENNIS STEPHENS

[email protected]