R v Makhakhe (CRI/A 25 of 80) [1980] LSHC 49 (5 August 1980)

R v Makhakhe (CRI/A 25 of 80) [1980] LSHC 49 (5 August 1980)

The conviction was unsafe because the prosecution suppressed medical evidence that could have supported the defence of consent, and the magistrate misdirected himself by not insisting on its production.

Citation
[1980] LSHC 49
Parties
Appellant: Thabang Makhakhe; Respondent: Rex
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
5 August 1980
Case Number
CRI/A 25 of 80
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside
Legal Topics
Rape, Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Rape Evidence Appeal Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thabang Makhakhe

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for rape was safe in light of the exclusion of medical evidence
  2. 2 Whether the complainant consented to sexual intercourse

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because the prosecution suppressed medical evidence that could have supported the defence of consent, and the magistrate misdirected himself by not insisting on its production.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside

Orders

  • conviction set aside
  • sentence set aside