High Court jails two for 30 years over brutal 2014 killing, rape

The High Court has handed down a 30-year prison sentence to two men for the brutal murder of an elderly tuck shop owner and the rape of a woman on the premises during a robbery in Outjo 12 years ago, in which they fled with recharge vouchers and cigarettes.

Judge Nate Ndauendapo sentenced Lourense Aib and Hendrik !Nowoseb to 30 years’ imprisonment each for murder, with additional sentences imposed for attempted murder, rape and robbery with aggravating circumstances.

The sentences on the remaining counts will run concurrently with the 30-year murder sentence.

The two were convicted in September 2025 on four counts, including murder, attempted murder, rape in contravention of the Combating of Rape Act 8 of 2000, and robbery with aggravating circumstances.

The convictions stem from an incident on 25 October 2014, when the pair forcefully entered a tuck shop at the home of the late 71-year-old Gerhardus Koekemoer.

During the attack, they assaulted and raped a woman on the premises.

Koekemoer, who responded after hearing the commotion, was stabbed to death before he could intervene.

Aib and !Nowoseb fled the scene with stolen recharge vouchers and cigarettes.

In sentencing, the court found that the personal circumstances of the accused carried little weight when balanced against the seriousness of the offences and the interests of society.

Ndauendapo said the crimes were marked by extreme violence, brutality and a disregard for human life and dignity, adding that neither accused demonstrated genuine remorse.

The court also took into account the accused’s criminal histories, including convictions for offences committed after the incident but finalised before sentencing, finding these relevant in assessing their character and propensity to offend.

The judge further considered constitutional concerns around excessively long sentences.

However, he ultimately held that the gravity of the offences warranted substantial custodial punishment.

The court emphasized the need for deterrent sentences in light of the prevalence of violent crime, stating that the interests of society outweighed the personal circumstances of the offenders.

[email protected]