Shonhiwa Gibson Mazikana denies killing Emily Munemo, a nurse at Watford General Hospital
A Wife killer who used two knives to slay his spouse in a “frenzied attack” has failed in a bid to clear his name.
Shonhiwa Gibson Mazikana, 42, killed Emily Munemo at her home, just weeks after he was cleared of a domestic violence attack on her.
Ms Munemo, a mother-of-two, worked as a nurse at Watford General Hospital.
Mazikana used two knives to inflict multiple wounds, one of which broke, leaving the knife blade embedded in her head.
The stabbing was described as a “frenzied attack” during his trial.
Mazikana denied being the killer, but was jailed for life after being convicted of murder by a jury at Southwark Crown Court in August last year.
He was ordered to serve at least 27 years behind bars before he could even apply for parole.
Top judges at London’s Criminal Appeal Court on Friday heard him apply for permission to appeal against his conviction, but this application was turned down.
Mr Justice Cranston, who heard the application alongside Lord Justice Lloyd Jones and Mrs Justice Andrews, said: “The evidence against him was overwhelming and this conviction is safe.”
The judges were told that the couple were both born in Zimbabwe.
Ms Munemo came to the UK in 1999, with Mazikana following a few years later.
But, by 2012, their relationship had deteriorated and he was seeing another woman in Birmingham.
The nurse was slain at her home in Collingwood Road, Uxbridge, in January last year.
Her husband, of Reid Close, Hayes, was later arrested and found to have her blood on his clothing.
Lawyers for Mazikana today argued that his trial was unfair, because he and his representatives had not attended for a large part of it.
He had cited medical issues, relating to a back problem, and his lawyers asked the trial judge several times for adjournments.
The pleas that his sicknote ought to excuse him were rejected however, as the trial judge had been advised by doctors that Mazikana was fit to be tried.
It was said that the trial should have been halted because the killer was “unable to advance his defence which needed to come from his own mouth”.
Mr Justice Cranston concluded: “There can be no objection relating to the medical problems.
“The judge had reports from two doctors saying this appellant was fit for trial. It would have been wrong not to continue.
“It was a murder trial, not to be equated with a week at work.”-watfordobserver