Mojakisane v S (A18/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 230 (7 December 2017)

Mojakisane v S (A18/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 230 (7 December 2017)

The conviction and sentence were set aside because the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to sexual intercourse, nor that the appellant knew or ought to have known that she was a minor or mentally retarded. The affidavit relied upon by the magistrate was insufficient, as it did not address the complainant's capacity to consent at the time of the incident. The magistrate's reliance on uncorroborated lay evidence and the affidavit was a misdirection. The appellant's rights to a fair trial were not violated, as he was repeatedly informed of his rights and chose to conduct his own defence. The State failed to prove the essential elements of...

Citation
[2017] ZAFSHC 230
Parties
Appellant: Steve Mojakisane; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 December 2017
Case Number
A18/2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Regional Magistrate's Court
Outcome
Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence set aside.
Judges
Mathebula, Phalatsi
Legal Topics
Rape, Consent, Fair Trial Rights, Mental Capacity, Minor Status
Criminal Law Rape Consent Fair Trial Rights Mental Capacity Minor Status

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steve Mojakisane

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Regional Magistrate's Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was afforded a fair trial in accordance with constitutional rights.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence established that the complainant did not consent to sexual intercourse.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant knew or ought to have known that the complainant was a minor or mentally retarded.

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction and sentence were set aside because the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to sexual intercourse, nor that the appellant knew or ought to have known that she was a minor or mentally retarded. The affidavit relied upon by the magistrate was insufficient, as it did not address the complainant's capacity to consent at the time of the incident. The magistrate's reliance on uncorroborated lay evidence and the affidavit was a misdirection. The appellant's rights to a fair trial were not violated, as he was repeatedly informed of his rights and chose to conduct his own defence. The State failed to prove the essential elements of...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • Both conviction and sentence are set aside.