A woman from Bulawayo is at the centre of an adultery storm after na_ked pictures of her that she allegedly sent to her married lover were produced in court by her lover’s wife. Rumbidzai Pride Sibanda produced nu_de pictures of Sanelisiwe Magama, apparently in a bid to convince the court she was allegedly involved in an adulterous relationship with her husband Silas Sibanda. Rumbidzai is demanding $10 000 from Magama as adultery damages.
In a suit filed under case number 9308/14 Rumbidzai claimed that her rival Magama had since November 2013 illicitly associated and engaged with her husband in an adulterous relationship. She said several pleas to Magama to end the alleged adulterous relationship fell on deaf ears. And as such she demanded an order for payment in the sum of $5000 being contumelia damages she suffered due to Magama’s illicit association with her husband and another $5000 being consortium damages she suffered as a result of withdrawal of comfort and love her spouse was providing her before he started seeing Magama.
Giving her evidence, Rumbidzai said she discovered that her husband was cheating on her when he started coming home late and depriving her of conjugal rights saying he was tired. On how she discovered the illicit relationship and stumbled upon Magama’s nu_de pictures in her husband’s phone, Rumbidzai said:
“It so happened that one day I took his phone when he was drunk and asleep. I sneaked with it into the bathroom and that is when I discovered that the two were having an affair from the messages and photos they were sending each other.
“The other day I sneaked into the spare bedroom where he was sleeping while he was bathing to see who he had been chatting with on his phone and that is when I discovered that it was Magama who had also sent him her nu_de pictures saying come I miss that big d***,” she said.
As if that was not enough, Rumbidzai also produced other pictures of Magama allegedly getting cosy with her husband while in Victoria Falls. Magama, however denied the allegations saying she knew Silas as one of her clients since she was in the business of selling clothes. Objecting to the production of pictures as an exhibit, Magama’s lawyer said: “In terms of the Civil Evidence Act (Chapter 8:01) section 21 which takes of the admissibility of photography… the person who took the is the one who should be giving evidence concerning the photography explaining to the court the circumstances in which the photography was taken. The second reason of objection is in terms of the above Act which explains the court’s power to exclude certain evidence which has been obtained illegally or improperly. It has been ruled in the High Court where it has been said that snooping into someone’s cell phone is as invasion of privacy”.
Meanwhile, despite the fact that the matter was struck off the roll on august 9 by Bulawayo magistrate Sheunesu Matova after both parties had failed to come to court, Rumbidzai has since filed another suit in which Magama is yet to respond to.