Convicted serial killer and former police officer Nomia Rosemary Ndlovu, together with her former colleague Nomsa Mudau, have been found guilty by the Kempton Park Regional Court of incitement, instigation, command, or procurement of a person to commit murder.

The judgment was handed down on May 20.

The court acquitted both accused of the charge of conspiracy to commit murder. In delivering judgment, the magistrate noted that there was no evidence proving that the accused had agreed to conspire.

During proceedings on April 8, the State called Mudau to testify as part of its closing submissions, where her version of events came under scrutiny.

Under cross-examination, prosecutor Williams challenged Mudau’s account of how she allegedly met middleman Lakhiwe Mkhize in Thembisa, describing it as ‘far-fetched’ and untrue.

He also questioned why she had not warned her husband after allegedly being informed that someone intended to kill him.

Mudau told the court she believed Mkhize appeared mentally unstable and posed no real threat, and therefore did not take the matter further.

Watch the video here

“He seemed harmless. I did not think it was important because I believed he was not mentally well,” she said.

Williams further put it to her that she had been angry with her husband and had approached Ndlovu to assist in arranging his murder.

Mudau denied this, insisting she had never planned to kill her husband.

Also read: Rosemary Ndlovu back in court as murder conspiracy case nears conclusion

The accused were charged under Section 18(2)(a) of the Riotous Assemblies Act 17 of 1956 for conspiracy to commit murder, with an alternative charge under Section 18(2)(b) relating to incitement, instigation, command, or procurement of a person to commit murder.

Both pleaded not guilty and exercised their right to remain silent, offering no plea explanation in terms of Section 115 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977.

The state led evidence from multiple witnesses, including Njabulo Vincent Kunene, Justice Mudau, Walter Musanda Nemukela, Jabulani Petros Mtshali and Lakhiwe Mkhize.

At the close of the state’s case, both accused applied for discharge in terms of Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the application was dismissed.

Ndlovu closed her case without presenting evidence. Mudau testified in her defence but called no further witnesses.

The state argued that key elements of its case were not challenged during cross-examination, including allegations that Ndlovu contacted Mkhize telephonically requesting assistance in arranging Mudau’s husband’s murder, and that Mudau later met Mkhize in Thembisa.

According to the state, these uncontested facts placed both accused within the scope of incitement as defined in Section 18(2)(b).

Also read: Former cop denies murder plot linked to Rosemary Ndlovu case

Testimony further detailed a series of meetings and communications involving individuals allegedly recruited to carry out the murder.

Kunene told the court he was approached to meet at a Thembisa hostel, where he was informed that a police officer, later identified as Mudau, wanted a ‘job’ done.

He said they later met her, where she allegedly requested that they kill her husband, citing alleged ill-treatment and infidelity, and indicated she would pay them following an insurance payout.

He further testified that Mudau was wearing a police uniform at the time and appeared rushed.

The group later approached Musanda, who ultimately assisted in warning the intended victim.

Justice Mudau, the husband of the accused, testified that on February 25, 2018, he was approached by a man who informed him that his wife had allegedly hired people to kill him. He was then introduced to individuals who confirmed the alleged plot.

He said he only confronted his wife after her arrest and release, during which she allegedly asked for forgiveness. This version was disputed under cross-examination.

Additional witnesses, including Musanda and Mtshali, corroborated aspects of the state’s case, stating that Mudau had repeated her request on several occasions before they ultimately decided to warn her husband instead.

Mkhize testified that he received a call from Ndlovu in February 2018 requesting assistance in arranging the murder, and that Mudau later reiterated the request during a meeting.

Ndlovu elected not to testify. The state argued that her silence allowed the court to draw an adverse inference, particularly regarding her alleged role in initiating the events.

The state further submitted that Mudau’s version was improbable, including her claim that she was approached by a stranger near a cemetery offering to kill her husband.

It argued that her failure to report such an incident, despite being a police officer, undermined her credibility.

Also read: State fails to secure key witness in Rosemary Ndlovu case

According to the state, witness testimony was broadly consistent and corroborated by details such as meeting locations, vehicle descriptions, and warnings issued to the intended victim.

While acknowledging minor discrepancies regarding payment details, the State argued these were attributable to the passage of time, as the events occurred in 2018.

The state maintains it has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mudau incited and procured the attempted murder of her husband, and that both accused should be convicted on the alternative charge.

Mudau’s ex-husband, Justice Mudau, told the Kempton Express that justice had finally been served.

“There is law in South Africa. I believe justice has been served and I will finally sleep tonight after eight years of lack of sleep,” he said.

The matter was postponed to July 15 for probation reports.