s v Cele and Others (277/85) [1986] ZASCA 72 (30 May 1986)

s v Cele and Others (277/85) [1986] ZASCA 72 (30 May 1986)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in convicting all seven appellants of murder based solely on the inference of common purpose. The evidence, including extra-curial statements and circumstantial facts, did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that all appellants shared a common intention...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1986] ZASCA 72
Parties
Appellant: Mbobo Cele; Appellant: Tulani Mkize; Appellant: Job Lungu; Appellant: Andries Majola; Appellant: Elias Mokoena; Appellant: Amos Zulu; Appellant: Phineas Maluleka; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 May 1986
Case Number
277/85
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal succeeds in part. Convictions and sentences for murder and death penalty set aside. First, fourth, and sixth appellants acquitted. Second, third, and seventh appellants convicted of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and sentenced to four years' imprisonment each. Fifth appellant convicted of...
Judges
Hoexter, Hefer, Smalberger
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Murder, Assault With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm, Culpable Homicide, Admissibility of Confessions, Onus of Proof
Criminal Law Common Purpose Murder Assault With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm Culpable Homicide Admissibility of Confessions Onus of Proof

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mbobo Cele

Appellant

Tulani Mkize

Appellant

Job Lungu

Appellant

Andries Majola

Appellant

Elias Mokoena

Appellant

Amos Zulu

Appellant

Phineas Maluleka

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether all appellants shared a common intention to murder the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence supports conviction of each appellant for murder or a lesser offence.
  3. 3 Whether extra-curial statements were admissible and properly weighed.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in convicting all seven appellants of murder based solely on the inference of common purpose. The evidence, including extra-curial statements and circumstantial facts, did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that all appellants shared a common intention to kill or participated actively in the killing. The Court held that the mere presence at the scene and subsequent escape did not suffice for a murder conviction. The first, fourth, and sixth appellants' statements were wholly exculpatory and not contradicted by other evidence; they were entitled to acquittal. The second, third, and seventh appellants admitted participation in...

Court Disposition

Appeal succeeds in part. Convictions and sentences for murder and death penalty set aside. First, fourth, and sixth appellants acquitted. Second, third, and seventh appellants convicted of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and sentenced to four years' imprisonment each. Fifth appellant convicted of...

Orders

  • The convictions and sentences for murder and death penalty imposed by the trial court are set aside.
  • The first, fourth, and sixth appellants are acquitted and discharged.