Ntelekoa and Another v S (A28/2013) [2015] ZAWCHC 213 (5 March 2015)

Ntelekoa and Another v S (A28/2013) [2015] ZAWCHC 213 (5 March 2015)

The appeal court found no misdirections in the trial court's reasoning or evaluation of the evidence. The first appellant's pointing out was properly admitted, having been made freely and voluntarily, and his version was found to be improbable and false. The second appellant's mother's evidence was correctly accepted as credible and reliable, and the only reasonable inference from the proven facts was that both appellants participated in the housebreaking, robbery, and murder. The alibi defences were rejected as not reasonably possibly true in light of the totality of the evidence. The State's case, based largely on circumstantial evidence, was sufficient to establish guilt beyond...

Citation
[2015] ZAWCHC 213
Parties
Appellant: Mohapi Johannes Ntelekoa; Appellant: Lebohang Ntelekoa; Respondent: The State
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 2015
Case Number
A28/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Full Bench Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions confirmed.
Judges
Daffue, Lekale, Hinxa
Legal Topics
Murder, Housebreaking With Intent to Rob, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Admissibility of Confession, Alibi Defence, Circumstantial Evidence
Criminal Law Murder Housebreaking With Intent to Rob Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Admissibility of Confession Alibi Defence Circumstantial Evidence

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 7 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohapi Johannes Ntelekoa

Appellant

Lebohang Ntelekoa

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Full Bench Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in finding that the State proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
  2. 2 Whether the pointing out by the first appellant was admissible and made freely and voluntarily.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly rejected the appellants' alibi defences as false and not reasonably possibly true.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found no misdirections in the trial court's reasoning or evaluation of the evidence. The first appellant's pointing out was properly admitted, having been made freely and voluntarily, and his version was found to be improbable and false. The second appellant's mother's evidence was correctly accepted as credible and reliable, and the only reasonable inference from the proven facts was that both appellants participated in the housebreaking, robbery, and murder. The alibi defences were rejected as not reasonably possibly true in light of the totality of the evidence. The State's case, based largely on circumstantial evidence, was sufficient to establish guilt beyond...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeals of both appellants are dismissed.
  • The convictions of both appellants are confirmed.