Masedi and Another v S (A717/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 708 (17 August 2016)

Masedi and Another v S (A717/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 708 (17 August 2016)

The court found that Ms T's evidence was credible and unchallenged, and the absence of alarm was consistent with her being threatened at knife point. The admissions regarding her age and medical evidence were valid and binding. However, the failure to forewarn the appellants about the statutory minimum sentence provisions constituted a procedural irregularity, requiring the court to reconsider the sentences afresh. While the crime was serious and warranted a substantial custodial sentence, life imprisonment was not the only appropriate sentence given the appellants' youth and lack of forewarning. The court substituted the life sentences with 18 years' imprisonment for each appellant,...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 708
Parties
Appellant: Frank Matome Masedi; Appellant: Jeffrey Selamolela; Respondent: State
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 August 2016
Case Number
A717/2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed for the first appellant; appeals against sentence upheld for both appellants; sentences of life imprisonment set aside and substituted with 18 years' imprisonment each, antedated to 2 September 2004.
Judges
HF Jacobs, Murphy JR, Mabuse PM
Legal Topics
Rape, Minimum Sentences, Admissions, Sentencing Irregularity, Condonation, Child Victim
Criminal Law Rape Minimum Sentences Admissions Sentencing Irregularity Condonation Child Victim

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

Parties

Frank Matome Masedi

Appellant

Jeffrey Selamolela

Appellant

State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction of the first appellant for rape should be upheld.
  2. 2 Whether the sentences of life imprisonment imposed on both appellants were appropriate given the statutory requirements and procedural irregularities.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants were properly forewarned about the minimum sentence provisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Ms T's evidence was credible and unchallenged, and the absence of alarm was consistent with her being threatened at knife point. The admissions regarding her age and medical evidence were valid and binding. However, the failure to forewarn the appellants about the statutory minimum sentence provisions constituted a procedural irregularity, requiring the court to reconsider the sentences afresh. While the crime was serious and warranted a substantial custodial sentence, life imprisonment was not the only appropriate sentence given the appellants' youth and lack of forewarning. The court substituted the life sentences with 18 years' imprisonment for each appellant,...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed for the first appellant; appeals against sentence upheld for both appellants; sentences of life imprisonment set aside and substituted with 18 years' imprisonment each, antedated to 2 September 2004.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted to the first and second appellants for the late filing of their notices of appeal.
  • The first appellant's appeal against his conviction is dismissed.