Rasemeni v S (A12/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 111 (15 April 2021)

Rasemeni v S (A12/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 111 (15 April 2021)

The appeal court found that the complainant's evidence was unsatisfactory, unreliable, and lacked corroboration. There were material contradictions between her testimony, police statement, and medical report, as well as improbabilities in her conduct and reporting of the incident. The State conceded that the evidence did not meet the required standard for conviction. The appellant's version was found to be reasonably possibly true. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence could not stand and were set aside.

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 111
Parties
Appellant: Moramang Peter Rasemeni; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 April 2021
Case Number
A12/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence set aside.
Judges
Opperman, Daniso
Legal Topics
Rape, Evaluation of Evidence, Single Witness Caution, Reasonable Doubt, Automatic Right of Appeal
Criminal Law Rape Evaluation of Evidence Single Witness Caution Reasonable Doubt Automatic Right of Appeal

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moramang Peter Rasemeni

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence established the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
  2. 2 Whether the complainant's evidence was satisfactory and reliable in all material respects.
  3. 3 Whether the contradictions and improbabilities in the complainant's evidence warranted setting aside the conviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found that the complainant's evidence was unsatisfactory, unreliable, and lacked corroboration. There were material contradictions between her testimony, police statement, and medical report, as well as improbabilities in her conduct and reporting of the incident. The State conceded that the evidence did not meet the required standard for conviction. The appellant's version was found to be reasonably possibly true. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence could not stand and were set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; conviction and sentence set aside.

Orders

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