Fanti v S (228/2013) [2014] ZAECGHC 102 (28 October 2014)

Fanti v S (228/2013) [2014] ZAECGHC 102 (28 October 2014)

The court held that the appellant's use of a potentially lethal weapon was excessive in relation to the attack by the now unarmed deceased. Although the appellant was attacked and threatened, once she had taken the knife from the deceased, her life was no longer in imminent danger. The appellant could have used less dangerous means to defend herself, such as extricating herself from the deceased's grip or removing the deceased's hand from her hair. The force used was not the only or least dangerous means available, and the appellant ought reasonably to have foreseen the possibility of death resulting from her actions. The conviction for culpable homicide was therefore upheld.

Citation
[2014] ZAECGHC 102
Parties
Appellant: Ziyanda Fanti; Respondent: The State
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 October 2014
Case Number
228/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction for culpable homicide upheld.
Judges
J M Roberson, C M Plasket
Legal Topics
Culpable Homicide, Self Defence, Excessive Force, Reasonable Possibility, Unlawful Attack
Criminal Law Culpable Homicide Self Defence Excessive Force Reasonable Possibility Unlawful Attack

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ziyanda Fanti

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant acted in self-defence when stabbing the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the force used by the appellant was excessive in relation to the threat posed by the deceased.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's actions amounted to culpable homicide.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the appellant's use of a potentially lethal weapon was excessive in relation to the attack by the now unarmed deceased. Although the appellant was attacked and threatened, once she had taken the knife from the deceased, her life was no longer in imminent danger. The appellant could have used less dangerous means to defend herself, such as extricating herself from the deceased's grip or removing the deceased's hand from her hair. The force used was not the only or least dangerous means available, and the appellant ought reasonably to have foreseen the possibility of death resulting from her actions. The conviction for culpable homicide was therefore upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction for culpable homicide upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal against conviction is dismissed.