S v De Jager (53/06) [2006] ZASCA 163 (26 September 2006)

S v De Jager (53/06) [2006] ZASCA 163 (26 September 2006)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found no reason to interfere with the trial court's factual findings. The complainant was considered an excellent witness whose developmental level did not permit fabrication of the incidents. Her evidence was corroborated by her friend and other circumstantial facts, including the appellant's own admissions and conduct. The discrepancies and contradictions cited by the appellant were minor and expected given the age of the witnesses, and did not cast doubt on the complainant's credibility. The evidence of the aunt was improperly admitted as a first report, but this error did not affect the conviction, as the complainant's evidence was otherwise sufficiently...

Citation
[2006] ZASCA 163
Parties
Appellant: Anthony Morné De Jager; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 September 2006
Case Number
53/06
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence confirmed.
Judges
Streicher, Theron, Cachalia
Legal Topics
Attempted Rape, Credibility of Witnesses, First Report Rule, Child Victims, Corroboration
Criminal Law Attempted Rape Credibility of Witnesses First Report Rule Child Victims Corroboration

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Morné De Jager

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of attempted rape on two counts.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence of the complainant and supporting witnesses was credible and sufficient to sustain the conviction.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly admitted the evidence of the complainant's aunt as a first report.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found no reason to interfere with the trial court's factual findings. The complainant was considered an excellent witness whose developmental level did not permit fabrication of the incidents. Her evidence was corroborated by her friend and other circumstantial facts, including the appellant's own admissions and conduct. The discrepancies and contradictions cited by the appellant were minor and expected given the age of the witnesses, and did not cast doubt on the complainant's credibility. The evidence of the aunt was improperly admitted as a first report, but this error did not affect the conviction, as the complainant's evidence was otherwise sufficiently...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are confirmed.