Bafedile v S (A28/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 974 (28 August 2023)

Bafedile v S (A28/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 974 (28 August 2023)

The court found that the complainant's evidence was inconsistent, contradictory, and riddled with improbabilities, particularly regarding her prior relationship with the appellant and the circumstances surrounding the alleged rape. The complainant changed her version multiple times, failed to provide a coherent account of the events, and her behaviour under cross-examination further undermined her credibility. The medico-legal report confirmed sexual intercourse but did not assist in determining lack of consent. The appellant's version was found to be clear, consistent, and honest, and the possibility that his account was reasonably true could not be excluded. The State failed to...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 974
Parties
Appellant: Fokobe Thabo Bafedile; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 August 2023
Case Number
A28/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted.
Judges
M A Makume, D Dosio
Legal Topics
Rape, Consent, Single Witness Cautionary Rule, Burden of Proof, Contradictory Evidence
Criminal Law Rape Consent Single Witness Cautionary Rule Burden of Proof Contradictory Evidence

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fokobe Thabo Bafedile

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant consented to sexual intercourse with the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence of the complainant was reliable and sufficient to sustain a conviction.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly applied the cautionary rule to the evidence of a single witness.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the complainant's evidence was inconsistent, contradictory, and riddled with improbabilities, particularly regarding her prior relationship with the appellant and the circumstances surrounding the alleged rape. The complainant changed her version multiple times, failed to provide a coherent account of the events, and her behaviour under cross-examination further undermined her credibility. The medico-legal report confirmed sexual intercourse but did not assist in determining lack of consent. The appellant's version was found to be clear, consistent, and honest, and the possibility that his account was reasonably true could not be excluded. The State failed to...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted.

Orders

  • The accused is found not guilty and discharged.