Barlow v S (A365/2012) [2015] ZAGPJHC 318 (30 January 2015)

Barlow v S (A365/2012) [2015] ZAGPJHC 318 (30 January 2015)

The court found that, despite contradictions between the State witnesses, their evidence was corroborated in material respects, particularly regarding the deceased's plea not to be shot and the circumstances of Ms Botha's shooting. The appellant's version of accidental shooting was not reasonably possibly true, and the failure to call two promised witnesses justified a negative inference against him. The trial court did not materially misdirect itself in evaluating the evidence, and its conclusion that the State proved its case beyond reasonable doubt was upheld. The appeal against conviction therefore failed.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPJHC 318
Parties
Appellant: Deshwin Barlow; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 January 2015
Case Number
A365/2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
The appeal against the conviction is dismissed.
Judges
TMT Makgoka, SS Mphahlele, J5 Baloyi
Legal Topics
Murder, Attempted Murder, Unlawful Possession of Firearm, Unlawful Possession of Ammunition, Evaluation of Evidence, Onus of Proof
Criminal Law Murder Attempted Murder Unlawful Possession of Firearm Unlawful Possession of Ammunition Evaluation of Evidence Onus of Proof

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deshwin Barlow

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court misdirected itself in evaluating the evidence and concluding that the State proved the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
  2. 2 Whether the contradictions in the State witnesses' evidence warranted overturning the conviction.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's version of accidental shooting was reasonably possibly true.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, despite contradictions between the State witnesses, their evidence was corroborated in material respects, particularly regarding the deceased's plea not to be shot and the circumstances of Ms Botha's shooting. The appellant's version of accidental shooting was not reasonably possibly true, and the failure to call two promised witnesses justified a negative inference against him. The trial court did not materially misdirect itself in evaluating the evidence, and its conclusion that the State proved its case beyond reasonable doubt was upheld. The appeal against conviction therefore failed.

Court Disposition

The appeal against the conviction is dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal against the conviction is dismissed.