By Viola Blues | Manchester Crown Court (5 March 2024)- Qoki Zindlovukazi business owner, Sithule Tshuma addressed Justice Isles in a coffin enclosure and lost the first round of the case against her on Tuesday after claiming her life is in danger from a large crowd of angry Zimbabweans when there were only 3 people in the courtroom: the complainant Sibo, journalist Simba Chikanza and Sibo’s blood brother. 

Miss Tshuma demanded saying she cannot access the court except while housed in a coffin through which only the judge can see her body . The court had to build for her a whole coffin structure so she can hide her face from the complainant and the rest of the people inside court .

Miss Tshuma is accused of making USD25Million from selling land that does not belong to her. 

There was no one else either inside or outside court interested in her case, and yet Miss Tshuma even demanded a special entrance and exit for herself.

When the session began at around 11am she tried to get Simba Chikanza removed from his role as a McKenzie friend for the complainant saying this is because he is a journalist, who has been writing things that are untrue. Her request was turned down as the judge said he is not doing any journalism inside court and even if he was, he would still be allowed in the session.

The judge insisted the case is of public interest and there are more complainants beyond Sibo (surname withheld), which that once the final ruling is made the effect will extend to all those other people.

Miss Tshuma presented an incomplete bundle that didn’t have her own statement, and when asked why she has failed to do the task of supplying her own witness account, she said to Justice Isles “I was overwhelmed.”

The judge ordered Miss Tshuma to pay the complainant costs of several hundreds of pounds being the complainant’s hotel and transport costs.

Miss Tshuma also claimed she has evidence from the government of Zimbabwe to prove she truly sold a stand to Sibo, and even those papers the judge said they need to be presented at once.

The judge indicated the three people Miss Tshuma has received witness support will need to attend in person.

It is the complainant (or applicant)’s case that Miss Tshuma’s title deeds are invalid and her entire business is fraudulent from inception.

The judge repeated the term, “public interest” over three times as she said she (the Judge) cannot make the ruling on the day as she wants to give Miss Tshuma the opportunity to submit her late statement and everything else because once the ruling is made, more people will be affected by it, suggesting that there are more people who will either benefit or lose from it.

It was first suggested that the case be adjourned to later in the afternoon, but Justice Isles said there is a long waiting list so the best option in all the circumstances will be to give Miss Tshuma several days to prepare.

Miss Tshuma will now need to supply her statement and pay the complainant by the 19th March 2024, and attend court in April.

The case was adjourned to a date after the 2nd April 2024.