R v Mebe and Another (CRI/A 30 of 93) [1995] LSCA 34 (13 February 1995)
The conviction was unsafe due to insufficient and unreliable identification evidence, factual misdirections by the trial court, and failure by the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of the doubt should have been given to the appellants.
- Citation
- [1995] LSCA 34
- Parties
- Appellant: 'Mebe 'Mebe; Appellant: Teboho Nauoe; Respondent: Rex
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Lesotho
- Judgment Date
- 13 February 1995
- Case Number
- CRI/A 30 of 93
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; convictions and sentences set aside
- Legal Topics
- Rape, Identification Evidence, Burden of Proof, Misdirection, Appellate Review
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
'Mebe 'Mebe
Appellant
Teboho Nauoe
Appellant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the identification evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for rape
- 2 Whether the trial court misdirected itself on the facts and law
- 3 Whether the prosecution discharged the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction was unsafe due to insufficient and unreliable identification evidence, factual misdirections by the trial court, and failure by the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of the doubt should have been given to the appellants.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; convictions and sentences set aside
Orders
- Appellants' convictions and sentences are set aside.
- Appellants' appeal deposits to be refunded.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment