Mother convicted of brutally murdering her son awaits sentencing in emotional court hearing
Noxolo Pearl Ngqono, convicted of murdering her son will hear her fate next week.
Image: Tracy-Lynn Ruiters
The fate of Noxolo Pearl Ngqono, convicted of brutally beating her five-year-old son to death with a mop after he had soiled himself, now lies in the hands of Acting Judge Amanda van Leeve.
Noxolo Pearl Ngqono appeared in the Wynberg Regional Court, sitting as the Western Cape High Court, where legal representatives made final submissions on what sentence should be imposed following her conviction for the murder of her young son.
The defence argued that the court should deviate from the prescribed minimum sentence, highlighting what it described as extraordinary personal circumstances surrounding the offences.
Her lawyer submitted that the assaults and eventual murder occurred during a period of “acute stress” in Ngqono’s life, including retrenchment, the Covid-19 pandemic and pregnancy. The court heard that Ngqono, who was 28 years old at the time of the murder, was still a young mother whose brain development was allegedly not yet fully complete.
The defence further argued that she posed a low risk of reoffending and was not a danger to society.
“She presents good prospects of rehabilitation,” the court heard. The defence also pointed to the severe trauma Ngqono had allegedly experienced following the incident, including separation from her children, emotional distress and financial hardship. Reference was again made to the social worker’s report, which suggested possible mental health associations linked to pregnancy and postnatal struggles, although no formal psychiatric diagnosis had been made.
The Defence stressed that the best interests of children remain paramount in sentencing matters involving a primary caregiver. He argued that the court traditionally takes such considerations into account.
Ngqono’s legal team asked the court to impose a sentence of 10 years imprisonment, with five years suspended. However, the State painted a starkly different picture, arguing that the brutality of the crime demanded a sentence reflecting the seriousness of the offence. The prosecutor reminded the court that both surviving children are currently in the care of their father and argued that expressions of regret do not necessarily amount to genuine remorse.
The State submitted that true remorse requires an accused person to take the court into their confidence and fully explain what happened. The prosecutor then shifted focus to the final moments of the five-year-old victim’s life, describing the fear and pain the child may have endured during the fatal assault.
The court heard that the child was attacked by the very person meant to protect him, his mother.
“He must have been fearful,” the prosecutor argued. The State highlighted the postmortem findings, telling the court that the child suffered a fractured skull, defensive wounds, internal injuries to the pancreas and liver, as well as spinal injuries. The prosecutor said the injuries pointed to a painful and violent death.
She further argued that throughout sentencing proceedings numerous people had spoken on behalf of the accused, yet nobody had truly been the voice for the murdered child.
“He was robbed of his future,” the court heard. “He had his whole life ahead of him.”
Following final arguments, Acting Judge Amanda van Leeve said there were numerous factors the court still had to consider before sentencing could be handed down. The matter was postponed and sentencing is expected to be delivered on May 14.