R v Leteka (CRI/S 4 of 89) [1989] LSCA 46 (28 April 1989)
The conviction was confirmed as the complainant's evidence was consistent, corroborated by medical evidence, and the accused made damaging admissions; the sentence was imposed considering the circumstances and time already served.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1989] LSCA 46
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Rex; Accused: Lefu Leteka
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Lesotho
- Case Number
- CRI/S 4 of 89
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Sentence Confirmation
- Outcome
- conviction confirmed, sentence imposed
- Legal Topics
- Rape, Sentencing, Appeal
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecutor
Lefu Leteka
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Confirmation
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for rape was supported by evidence
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction was confirmed as the complainant's evidence was consistent, corroborated by medical evidence, and the accused made damaging admissions; the sentence was imposed considering the circumstances and time already served.
Court Disposition
conviction confirmed, sentence imposed
Orders
- Accused sentenced to five years' imprisonment with effect from 23rd June 1988
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CRI/S/4/89 IN _ T_H_E_ H_I_G H _C_O U R_T_ O F_ _L_E S O T H O In the matter of: R EX v LEFU LETEKA Before the Honourable the Chief Justice Mr. Justice B. P. Cullinan on the 28th day of April 1989 For the Crown : Mr. S. Mdhluli Director of Public Prosecutions For the Accused : In Person J U D G M E NT The accused was convicted by t he S u b o r d i n a te Court of the First Class for the M a s e ru District of r a p e. The accused admitted sexual i n t e r c o u r se with the s i x t e e n - y e a r - o ld c o m p l a i n a n t, stating that she had c o n s e n t e d. She h a d, h o w e v e r, m a de a c o m p l a i nt to her m o t h er which e s t a b l i s h ed the c o n s i s t e n cy of her e v i d e n c e, as the learned trial M a g i s t r a te o b s e r v e d. F u r t h e r, t he medical e v i d e n ce c o r r o b o r a t ed the c o m p l a i n t 's e v i d e n ce of n o n - c o n s e n t; As for the a c c u s e d, he m a de 'a n u m b er of d a m a g i ng a d m i s s i o ns under c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n. I c o n s i d er that the learned trial M a g i s t r a te was fully justifed in accepting the c o m p l a i n a n t 's . e v i d e n ce and rejecting the a c c u s e d 's e v i d e n ce as not being r e a s o n a b ly t r u e. I find t he p r o c e e d i n gs to be in a c c o r d a n ce - 2- with real and substantial justice and the conviction is accordingly confirmed. The trial took place on the 23rd of June, 1988. The learned trial Magistrate's Jurisdiction in the matter of sentence at the time was a punishment of two y e a r s' imprisonment. She considered her sentencing powers inadequate, and after considering a number of a u t h o r i t i e s, for very full reasons committed the accused for sentence to this Court. The accused is aged twenty-seven y e a r s .. He is a first o f f e n d e r. The complainant was aged about sixteen y e a r s, h o w e v e r. Nonetheless, the minimum of force was used and I do not consider this in all the circumstances to be a bad case of r a p e. The accused has now been in prison for ten m o n t h s. Under the circumstances I sentence him to five y e a r s' imprisonment with effect from 23rd of June, 1988, the date of his conviction in the Court below. Delivered at Maseru This 28th day of A p r i l, 1989. (B. P. CULLINAN) CHIEF JUSTICE