Damgazela and Another v S (A219/2008) [2009] ZAFSHC 69 (11 June 2009)

Damgazela and Another v S (A219/2008) [2009] ZAFSHC 69 (11 June 2009)

The court found that the complainant and her friend had known the first appellant prior to the incident and were able to identify him at the scene, despite minor discrepancies in clothing descriptions and poor lighting. The evidence of the complainant and her friend was consistent and credible, and the explanations provided by the appellants were improbable and contradicted by the State witnesses. The court held that the identification of the first appellant was reliable and that both appellants placed themselves at the scene. Their versions were not reasonably possibly true. The conviction and sentences were therefore justified and should be confirmed.

Citation
[2009] ZAFSHC 69
Parties
Appellant: Petrus Themba Damgazela; Appellant: Isaac Lingelile Mhkehlane; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2009
Case Number
A219/2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal against conviction and sentence by both appellants is dismissed. The convictions and sentences are confirmed.
Judges
R Rampai, R Kruger, W Van Rooyen
Legal Topics
Rape, Identification Evidence, Credibility of Witnesses, Reasonable Doubt, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Rape Identification Evidence Credibility of Witnesses Reasonable Doubt 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petrus Themba Damgazela

Appellant

Isaac Lingelile Mhkehlane

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first appellant was correctly identified as the perpetrator of rape.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction of both appellants was justified beyond reasonable doubt.
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed were appropriate given the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the complainant and her friend had known the first appellant prior to the incident and were able to identify him at the scene, despite minor discrepancies in clothing descriptions and poor lighting. The evidence of the complainant and her friend was consistent and credible, and the explanations provided by the appellants were improbable and contradicted by the State witnesses. The court held that the identification of the first appellant was reliable and that both appellants placed themselves at the scene. Their versions were not reasonably possibly true. The conviction and sentences were therefore justified and should be confirmed.

Court Disposition

The appeal against conviction and sentence by both appellants is dismissed. The convictions and sentences are confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal of both appellants against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
  • The convictions and sentences imposed by the trial court are confirmed.