Khorommbi and Another v S (572/13) [2013] ZASCA 199 (2 December 2013)

Khorommbi and Another v S (572/13) [2013] ZASCA 199 (2 December 2013)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the complainants' evidence was fraught with improbabilities and inconsistencies, particularly regarding their conduct at the shebeen and their failure to seize opportunities to escape or seek help. The report to the second complainant's mother was made only after she was beaten by a policeman, rendering it inadmissible. The medical evidence did not corroborate the allegations of rape, as no fresh injuries or evidence of penetration were found. The appellants' version was corroborated by Z, whose evidence was not contradicted. The court concluded that the State failed to discharge the onus of proof beyond reasonable doubt, and good cause was shown to...

Citation
[2013] ZASCA 199
Parties
Appellant: Khorommbi Ntshengedzeni Alfred; Appellant: Khorommbi Thifhelimbilu Kenneth; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 December 2013
Case Number
572/13
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences set aside.
Judges
Navsa, Malan, Tshiqi
Legal Topics
Rape, Credibility of Witnesses, Onus of Proof, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Rape Credibility of Witnesses Onus of Proof Admissibility of 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khorommbi Ntshengedzeni Alfred

Appellant

Khorommbi Thifhelimbilu Kenneth

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence of the complainants was reliable and sufficient to sustain convictions for rape.
  2. 2 Whether the report made to the complainant's mother was admissible and properly considered.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the appellants' version and accepting the State's case.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the complainants' evidence was fraught with improbabilities and inconsistencies, particularly regarding their conduct at the shebeen and their failure to seize opportunities to escape or seek help. The report to the second complainant's mother was made only after she was beaten by a policeman, rendering it inadmissible. The medical evidence did not corroborate the allegations of rape, as no fresh injuries or evidence of penetration were found. The appellants' version was corroborated by Z, whose evidence was not contradicted. The court concluded that the State failed to discharge the onus of proof beyond reasonable doubt, and good cause was shown to...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The convictions and sentences imposed by the trial court are set aside.