Bakumeni v S (A40/2006) [2008] ZAWCHC 150 (29 February 2008)

Bakumeni v S (A40/2006) [2008] ZAWCHC 150 (29 February 2008)

The court found that the appellant's version of self-defence was not reasonably possibly true when considered against the totality of the evidence. The appellant exaggerated the threat against him, and there was no objective support for his claim of a life-threatening attack. The appellant, a trained police officer, fired his service pistol in circumstances where his actions were not justified by self-defence. The court agreed with the trial magistrate that dolus eventualis was present, satisfying the mens rea requirement for attempted murder. The convictions for attempted murder and common assault were upheld. Regarding sentence, the court found the five-year imprisonment appropriate...

Citation
[2008] ZAWCHC 150
Parties
Appellant: Lingelethu Bakumeni; Respondent: The State
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 February 2008
Case Number
A40/2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From the Cape Town Regional Court
Outcome
Convictions for attempted murder and common assault upheld. Sentence of five years' imprisonment suspended for five years on specified conditions. Declaration of unfitness to possess a firearm confirmed.
Judges
Duminy, D. H. van Zyl
Legal Topics
Attempted Murder, Common Assault, Self Defence, Dolus Eventualis, Sentencing Principles
Criminal Law Attempted Murder Common Assault Self Defence Dolus Eventualis Sentencing Principles

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 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lingelethu Bakumeni

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From the Cape Town Regional Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's firing of shots constituted attempted murder or was justified by self-defence.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for common assault was correct.
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate given the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant's version of self-defence was not reasonably possibly true when considered against the totality of the evidence. The appellant exaggerated the threat against him, and there was no objective support for his claim of a life-threatening attack. The appellant, a trained police officer, fired his service pistol in circumstances where his actions were not justified by self-defence. The court agreed with the trial magistrate that dolus eventualis was present, satisfying the mens rea requirement for attempted murder. The convictions for attempted murder and common assault were upheld. Regarding sentence, the court found the five-year imprisonment appropriate...

Court Disposition

Convictions for attempted murder and common assault upheld. Sentence of five years' imprisonment suspended for five years on specified conditions. Declaration of unfitness to possess a firearm confirmed.

Orders

  • The conviction for attempted murder is upheld.
  • The conviction for common assault is upheld.