An Eastern Cape woman has been convicted of the premeditated murder of six-year-old Likuwe Mpokopi, bringing a two-year court case to the point where attention now turns to sentencing.
Noluvuyo Sinyikatha, 23, was found guilty in the Eastern Cape Division of the High Court in Mthatha after the court heard how Likuwe was taken to a river in Ngcanasini, Mqanduli, on 28 August 2024.
The child’s body was later found floating in the river by women who had gone to collect firewood.
The conviction was secured through a combination of circumstantial evidence and a confession that Sinyikatha later sought to withdraw.
The National Prosecuting Authority said the court ultimately found that the State had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The case centred on the belief that Sinyikatha held about the death of her own nine-month-old baby.
The State established that Sinyikatha believed Likuwe’s mother was responsible for the infant’s death, even though the baby had died after an illness.
Likuwe’s mother was the sister of Sinyikatha’s boyfriend and the father of Sinyikatha’s late child.
The families had been living together at the Mpokopi homestead before the infant died.
The prosecution’s case was that this belief became the motive for the killing of Likuwe.
Child Found In River
Likuwe’s body was discovered in the late afternoon by women collecting firewood near the river.
Members of the community gathered at the scene, but there was initially no clear explanation for how the child had ended up in the water.
The stream was described as shallow and was situated some distance from the child’s home.
The absence of an immediate explanation meant that investigators had to reconstruct the child’s final movements through witness accounts and other evidence.
Two days after the child’s death, a community member approached police with information that changed the direction of the investigation.
The witness said she had seen Sinyikatha walking with Likuwe towards the river shortly before midday on the day of the murder.
Another witness later described seeing a woman matching Sinyikatha’s description dragging a young girl towards the river.
Neither witness saw the actual drowning, but the evidence placed Sinyikatha and the child together on the route to the river before Likuwe died.
The court was required to consider whether those facts, together with the other evidence, pointed to Sinyikatha’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
It ultimately found that the State had established the case.
Confession Challenged In Court
A central part of the trial was Sinyikatha’s confession.
When the trial began, she challenged whether the confession should be admitted as evidence.
That challenge resulted in a trial-within-a-trial, a separate hearing in which the court considers whether a statement was obtained lawfully and can be used in the main proceedings.
The court ruled that the confession was admissible.
The confession was then considered alongside the circumstantial evidence presented by the State.
Sinyikatha had sought to retract the confession, but the court’s ruling meant that the statement remained part of the evidence against her.
The State also led testimony from the community members who had seen the accused with the child or observed a woman matching her description near the river.
The prosecution did not rely on a witness who had seen the drowning itself.
Instead, the case was built from the sequence of events, the witnesses’ observations, the discovery of Likuwe’s body and the confession accepted by the court.
Such cases require a court to examine whether separate pieces of evidence support one another and whether there is any reasonable explanation consistent with innocence.
In this matter, the court concluded that the combined evidence met the required standard.
Belief About Baby’s Death
The motive presented in court was linked to the death of Sinyikatha’s baby, who had been nine months old.
The infant died a few days before Likuwe was killed.
The State said the baby had died following an illness, but Sinyikatha believed the child’s mother had caused the death.
That belief was presented as the reason she targeted Likuwe.
The relationship between the families formed an important part of the case.
Likuwe’s mother was not a stranger to Sinyikatha. She was the sister of Sinyikatha’s boyfriend and the father of the infant who had died.
The families had shared the Mpokopi homestead, meaning that the adults knew one another and that Likuwe was within the family’s immediate surroundings.
The conviction means the court accepted the State’s account of the motive and the chain of evidence proving Sinyikatha’s role in the child’s death.
The full reasons for the judgment will be important in showing how the court assessed the confession, the witness testimony and the circumstantial evidence.
NPA Welcomes Conviction
Eastern Cape NPA spokesperson Luxolo Tyali said the prosecuting authority’s attention had now turned to the sentencing proceedings.
Sentencing is expected to take place on 18 September 2026.
The State is expected to ask the court for a sentence that reflects the seriousness of the offence and the fact that the victim was a young child.
The NPA has commended the prosecution and investigating officer for the work that led to the conviction.
The case required investigators to establish what happened after Likuwe was seen leaving the homestead and to connect the available evidence to the child’s death.
The fact that there was no eyewitness to the drowning made the circumstantial evidence particularly important.
The court nevertheless found that the evidence, viewed as a whole, proved the State’s case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sentencing Now Awaits
The conviction does not conclude the proceedings.
The court must still hear evidence and submissions relevant to the sentence before deciding the punishment Sinyikatha will receive.
The State may present aggravating factors, while the defence may place mitigating circumstances before the court.
The sentencing process gives the court an opportunity to consider the nature of the crime, the age of the victim, the planning involved, the motive presented during the trial and the personal circumstances of the convicted woman.
The court may also hear from people affected by Likuwe’s death, depending on the information placed before it.
For Likuwe’s family and the community, the sentencing date will be another difficult stage in a case that began with the discovery of a child’s body in a river.
The conviction has established the criminal responsibility of Sinyikatha in the eyes of the court, but it cannot undo the loss suffered by the child’s family.
It has, however, provided a judicial finding about what happened and why the court accepted the State’s version.
The case also highlights the danger of acting on an unproven belief about the death of a loved one.
The State’s evidence was that Sinyikatha blamed Likuwe’s mother for the infant’s death, even though the baby had died following an illness.
That belief led, according to the prosecution, to the targeting of a six-year-old child who had no responsibility for the infant’s death.
The High Court’s decision followed a careful examination of the evidence, including the contested confession and the testimony of witnesses who placed Sinyikatha with Likuwe before the child was taken to the river.
The sentencing proceedings on 18 September will determine the next chapter in the case.
Until then, Likuwe’s family is left to grieve the loss of a young child, while the court prepares to decide the punishment for the woman convicted of taking her life.
