S v Goosen (129/1986) [1987] ZASCA 121 (30 September 1987)

S v Goosen (129/1986) [1987] ZASCA 121 (30 September 1987)

The court found that the appellant's evidence regarding the alleged involuntary nature of his actions and lack of criminal capacity was patently false. The suicide note written by the appellant was incompatible with his version of events and indicated contemplation of his own death after the killing, not before. The appellant's failure to mention the sleeping tablets in his statement to the police and his conduct after the killing further undermined his defence. The expert evidence relied upon by the appellant was rendered invalid as its factual basis was rejected. The court concluded that there was no reasonable possibility that the appellant acted involuntarily, unconsciously, or...

Citation
[1987] ZASCA 121
Parties
Appellant: Percival Robert Goosen; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 September 1987
Case Number
129/1986
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Conviction for murder confirmed.
Judges
Joubert, Botha, Nestadt
Legal Topics
Murder, Criminal Capacity, Intoxication, Provocation, Voluntariness
Criminal Law Murder Criminal Capacity Intoxication Provocation Voluntariness

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Percival Robert Goosen

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant acted voluntarily when killing the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had criminal capacity at the time of the killing.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant had the requisite intention to kill the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant's evidence regarding the alleged involuntary nature of his actions and lack of criminal capacity was patently false. The suicide note written by the appellant was incompatible with his version of events and indicated contemplation of his own death after the killing, not before. The appellant's failure to mention the sleeping tablets in his statement to the police and his conduct after the killing further undermined his defence. The expert evidence relied upon by the appellant was rendered invalid as its factual basis was rejected. The court concluded that there was no reasonable possibility that the appellant acted involuntarily, unconsciously, or...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Conviction for murder confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The conviction for murder stands.