Rohde v S (483/2019) [2019] ZAWCHC 100; 2019 (2) SACR 422 (WCC); [2019] 4 All SA 310 (WCC) (15 August 2019)

Rohde v S (483/2019) [2019] ZAWCHC 100; 2019 (2) SACR 422 (WCC); [2019] 4 All SA 310 (WCC) (15 August 2019)

The court held that the applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving that his release on bail pending appeal would be in the interests of justice. The seriousness of the offence—murder of his wife and subsequent staging of the crime as suicide—together with the lengthy sentence of 20 years, weighed heavily against bail. The applicant's multiple citizenships and overseas assets increased the risk of flight, notwithstanding the surrender of passports. The financial and emotional hardships cited were not new facts but inevitable consequences of incarceration, and business interests do not justify preferential treatment. The granting of leave to appeal by the Supreme Court of Appeal was...

Citation
[2019] ZAWCHC 100
Parties
Applicant: Jason Thomas Rohde; Respondent: The State
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 August 2019
Case Number
483/2019
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Application for Bail Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for bail pending appeal dismissed.
Judges
Salie-Hlophe
Legal Topics
Bail Pending Appeal, Flight Risk, Interests of Justice, Gender Based Violence, Correctional Services Act, Financial Hardship
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Bail Pending Appeal Flight Risk Interests of Justice Gender Based Violence Correctional Services Act Financial Hardship

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Thomas Rohde

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bail Application / Application for Bail Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has discharged the onus to show that it is in the interests of justice to grant bail pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the granting of leave to appeal by the Supreme Court of Appeal constitutes a new fact justifying bail.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant poses a flight risk given his multiple citizenships and overseas assets.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving that his release on bail pending appeal would be in the interests of justice. The seriousness of the offence—murder of his wife and subsequent staging of the crime as suicide—together with the lengthy sentence of 20 years, weighed heavily against bail. The applicant's multiple citizenships and overseas assets increased the risk of flight, notwithstanding the surrender of passports. The financial and emotional hardships cited were not new facts but inevitable consequences of incarceration, and business interests do not justify preferential treatment. The granting of leave to appeal by the Supreme Court of Appeal was...

Court Disposition

Application for bail pending appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for bail is dismissed.
  • The Chief Registrar is directed to furnish a copy of this judgment and the transcription of proceedings to the Supreme Court of Appeal for the appeal record (Case No: 483/2019).