Babuli and Others v National Director of Public Prosecution and Another (CC32/14) [2017] ZAGPPHC 64 (24 February 2017)

Babuli and Others v National Director of Public Prosecution and Another (CC32/14) [2017] ZAGPPHC 64 (24 February 2017)

The appeal court found that the trial court erred in relying on extra-curial statements made by accused 1 and 7 to convict the appellants, as such statements are inadmissible against co-accused. The evidence of the single witnesses, Mr Mpandana and Ms Tlako, was found to be unreliable, contradictory, and lacking corroboration. The court held that the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants conspired to commit murder or acted with a common purpose. The admissible evidence did not establish a definite agreement to kill the deceased, nor did it prove the appellants' involvement in the murder. Consequently, the convictions and sentences could not be sustained.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 64
Parties
Appellant: Keobakile F Babuli; Appellant: Itumeleng J Molebatsi; Appellant: William Lesole Malefo; Appellant: Khotso Bennet Kadi; Respondent: National Director of Public Prosecution; Respondent: Deputy Director of Public Prosecution, North Gauteng, Pretoria
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 February 2017
Case Number
CC32/14
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences of the four appellants set aside.
Judges
Strydom, Moshidi, Meyer
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Extra Curial Statements, Single Witness Rule, Common Purpose, Conspiracy to Commit Murder
Criminal Law Admissibility of Evidence Extra Curial Statements Single Witness Rule Common Purpose Conspiracy to Commit Murder

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keobakile F Babuli

Appellant

Itumeleng J Molebatsi

Appellant

William Lesole Malefo

Appellant

Khotso Bennet Kadi

Appellant

National Director of Public Prosecution

Respondent

Deputy Director of Public Prosecution, North Gauteng, Pretoria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extra-curial statements of co-accused are admissible against other accused.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence of single witnesses was satisfactory and credible to sustain convictions.
  3. 3 Whether the State proved beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the appellants on conspiracy and murder charges.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found that the trial court erred in relying on extra-curial statements made by accused 1 and 7 to convict the appellants, as such statements are inadmissible against co-accused. The evidence of the single witnesses, Mr Mpandana and Ms Tlako, was found to be unreliable, contradictory, and lacking corroboration. The court held that the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants conspired to commit murder or acted with a common purpose. The admissible evidence did not establish a definite agreement to kill the deceased, nor did it prove the appellants' involvement in the murder. Consequently, the convictions and sentences could not be sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences of the four appellants set aside.

Orders

  • The appeals of the four appellants are upheld.
  • The convictions and sentences are set aside.