Maqubela v S (821/2015) [2017] ZASCA 137; 2017 (2) SACR 690 (SCA) (29 September 2017)

Maqubela v S (821/2015) [2017] ZASCA 137; 2017 (2) SACR 690 (SCA) (29 September 2017)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred by applying the scientific measure of proof (scientific certainty) rather than the judicial measure (probability) to the expert medical evidence regarding the cause of death. The evidence of Professor Saayman, the appellant's expert, indicated that natural causes were the probable cause of death, and this was not excluded by the State's expert. The trial court's reliance on the appellant's mendacity and guilty conduct was insufficient to prove murder beyond reasonable doubt, as unlawful killing was not the only reasonable inference from the facts. The absence of proof of a probable or certain cause of death precluded a finding of...

Citation
[2017] ZASCA 137
Parties
Appellant: Thandi Sheryl Maqubela; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 2017
Case Number
821/2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence for murder set aside; appellant found not guilty and discharged on count 1.
Judges
Ponnan, Leach, Tshiqi, Swain, Ploos van Amstel
Legal Topics
Murder, Expert Evidence, Inferential Reasoning, Actus Reus, Consciousness of Guilt
Criminal Law Murder Expert Evidence Inferential Reasoning Actus Reus Consciousness of Guilt

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

Parties

Thandi Sheryl Maqubela

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in finding the appellant guilty of murder despite inconclusive medical evidence regarding the cause of death.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court incorrectly relied on the appellant's mendacity and evidence of guilty conduct to infer murder beyond reasonable doubt.
  3. 3 Whether the distinction between scientific and judicial measures of proof was properly applied in assessing expert medical evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred by applying the scientific measure of proof (scientific certainty) rather than the judicial measure (probability) to the expert medical evidence regarding the cause of death. The evidence of Professor Saayman, the appellant's expert, indicated that natural causes were the probable cause of death, and this was not excluded by the State's expert. The trial court's reliance on the appellant's mendacity and guilty conduct was insufficient to prove murder beyond reasonable doubt, as unlawful killing was not the only reasonable inference from the facts. The absence of proof of a probable or certain cause of death precluded a finding of...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence for murder set aside; appellant found not guilty and discharged on count 1.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The conviction and sentence of the appellant, Thandi Sheryl Maqubela, on count 1 are set aside and replaced by: 'On count 1, the charge of the murder of Mr Patrick Ntobeko Maqubela, accused number 1 is found not guilty and discharged.'