King v S (A79/2011) [2014] ZAWCHC 129 (22 August 2014)

King v S (A79/2011) [2014] ZAWCHC 129 (22 August 2014)

The court found that the regional magistrate erred in accepting the evidence of Mr Laykers as credible and reliable in all material respects, particularly given the contradictions and inconsistencies in his testimony. The refusal to admit Laykers' written statement further prejudiced the appellant. The court held that the requirements for dolus eventualis were not established beyond reasonable doubt, as the appellant did not subjectively foresee or reconcile himself with the possibility of causing death when firing warning shots in an upward direction. The appellant acted reasonably in the execution of his duties as a police officer in a dangerous situation, and the State failed to prove...

Citation
[2014] ZAWCHC 129
Parties
Appellant: Jerome Earl King; Respondent: The State
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 August 2014
Case Number
A79/2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Full Bench Appeal
Outcome
Appeal against conviction succeeds; conviction and sentence set aside.
Judges
P L Goliath, B P Mantame, A P Blignault
Legal Topics
Murder, Dolus Eventualis, Police Conduct, Credibility of Single Witness, Appeal Against Conviction
Criminal Law Murder Dolus Eventualis Police Conduct Credibility of Single Witness Appeal Against Conviction

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jerome Earl King

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Full Bench Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence supports a conviction of murder against the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the regional magistrate correctly applied the test for dolus eventualis.
  3. 3 Whether the evidence of the single witness, Mr Laykers, was credible and reliable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the regional magistrate erred in accepting the evidence of Mr Laykers as credible and reliable in all material respects, particularly given the contradictions and inconsistencies in his testimony. The refusal to admit Laykers' written statement further prejudiced the appellant. The court held that the requirements for dolus eventualis were not established beyond reasonable doubt, as the appellant did not subjectively foresee or reconcile himself with the possibility of causing death when firing warning shots in an upward direction. The appellant acted reasonably in the execution of his duties as a police officer in a dangerous situation, and the State failed to prove...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction succeeds; conviction and sentence set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal against the appellant's conviction succeeds.
  • The conviction on the charge of murder and the resultant sentence are set aside.