Lebese and Another v S (CAF21/15) [2015] ZANWHC 68 (15 October 2015)

Lebese and Another v S (CAF21/15) [2015] ZANWHC 68 (15 October 2015)

The court found that the evidence against the first appellant did not prove intent to kill but established that he foresaw the possibility of death resulting from the assaults, warranting a conviction for culpable homicide rather than murder. The first appellant's involvement in the kidnapping was confirmed. The sentence for culpable homicide was set at nine years imprisonment for each count, with the kidnapping sentence to run concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of nine years. The evidence against the second appellant was insufficient; the witness's reluctant concession under cross-examination was not reliable, and his conviction and sentence were set aside. The appeal by...

Citation
[2015] ZANWHC 68
Parties
Appellant: Samuel Jappie Lebese; Appellant: Simon Songo; Respondent: The State
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 October 2015
Case Number
CAF 21/15
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal by first appellant against murder convictions and sentences upheld; convictions set aside and replaced with culpable homicide. Sentence imposed afresh. Appeal against kidnapping conviction dismissed. Sentences to run concurrently, effective sentence nine years imprisonment, antedated to 2 December 2009....
Judges
Landman, Kgoele, Chwaro
Legal Topics
Culpable Homicide, Kidnapping, Single Witness Evidence, Appeal Procedure, Sentencing Principles
Criminal Law Culpable Homicide Kidnapping Single Witness Evidence Appeal Procedure Sentencing Principles

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samuel Jappie Lebese

Appellant

Simon Songo

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the convictions for murder and kidnapping against the first appellant were supported by the evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the second appellant's conviction was justified on the evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed were appropriate given the facts and legal findings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the evidence against the first appellant did not prove intent to kill but established that he foresaw the possibility of death resulting from the assaults, warranting a conviction for culpable homicide rather than murder. The first appellant's involvement in the kidnapping was confirmed. The sentence for culpable homicide was set at nine years imprisonment for each count, with the kidnapping sentence to run concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of nine years. The evidence against the second appellant was insufficient; the witness's reluctant concession under cross-examination was not reliable, and his conviction and sentence were set aside. The appeal by...

Court Disposition

Appeal by first appellant against murder convictions and sentences upheld; convictions set aside and replaced with culpable homicide. Sentence imposed afresh. Appeal against kidnapping conviction dismissed. Sentences to run concurrently, effective sentence nine years imprisonment, antedated to 2 December 2009....

Orders

  • The appeal by the first appellant against his conviction and sentence on counts 1 and 2 of murder is upheld.
  • The convictions for murder are set aside and the first appellant is found guilty on counts 1 and 2 of culpable homicide.