Courtroom Bombshell: Wife Protects Lover, Paints Husband As Abuser
HARARE — A woman at the centre of a high-stakes adultery lawsuit shocked the High Court last week by defending her alleged lover and accusing her estranged husband of r@p€, drunken abuse, and public humiliation.
Nyashadzashe Munyaradzi Maphosa, whose husband Dingaani Thomas Mbondiya is suing Christon Chiridza for adultery damages, testified that her marriage had already collapsed before the affair began.
She told the court she filed for divorce in 2022 under case number HCHF7305/22, citing years of emotional and physical abuse.
Maphosa described a toxic home environment where her husband frequently returned drunk and became violent.
“He would often come home drunk and force me to have sex with him. He insulted me in front of visitors and even called my mother a witch,” she said, her voice steady but firm.
She added that during those episodes, Mbondiya would urinate and vomit on himself, leaving her to clean up the mess.
Her testimony drew immediate objections from Mbondiya’s lawyer, Dube-Tachiona, who argued that the statements were irrelevant and amounted to character assassination.
But Justice Christopher Dube-Banda overruled the objections, stating that the evidence was both admissible and necessary to understand the full context of the marriage’s breakdown.
“The defendant has a right to present evidence of the character of the plaintiff to dispute liability or in mitigation of damages.
“To uphold these objections would result in an injustice and will destroy the very basis upon which the justice system rests,” he ruled.
Chiridza’s defence now leans heavily on Maphosa’s account, which suggests the marriage was already irreparably damaged before the alleged affair.
The judge emphasized that the court must consider all contributing factors, not just the adultery claim.
“The evidence of this witness about the cause of the breakdown of her marriage to the plaintiff is relevant and admissible.
“There is no rule of evidence that excludes it,” he said.
Justice Dube-Banda also cited Section 33(a) of the Civil Evidence Act [Chapter 8:01], which allows character evidence in damages claims where reputation is central to the case.
He clarified that the issue was not whether the testimony could be heard, but how much weight it would carry.
“This is not an issue of admissibility but of weight. Evidence is either admissible or inadmissible. It is only after it has been admitted that the issue of its persuasiveness arises,” he explained.
The ruling opens the door for Chiridza to argue that Mbondiya’s alleged conduct — not adultery was the true cause of the marital collapse.
— Ignite Media Zimbabwe
