S v Hlongwane and Another (40/2022) [2022] ZAFSHC 314 (4 November 2022)

S v Hlongwane and Another (40/2022) [2022] ZAFSHC 314 (4 November 2022)

The court found that the State's case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, which was riddled with inconsistencies and improbabilities, particularly in the testimony of the key witness, Mr Mosia. The identification parade was not conducted in accordance with established procedures, and the witness's account was unreliable and contradictory. The timeline of events was unclear, and there was no direct evidence linking the accused to the robbery and murder. The State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offences. The evidence presented did not exclude all reasonable inferences except the guilt of the accused. Accordingly, the accused were acquitted...

Citation
[2022] ZAFSHC 314
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Manqoba Xolani Hlongwane; Defendant: Khulekani Dlamini
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 November 2022
Case Number
40/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Both accused are found not guilty and acquitted on both counts.
Judges
Molitsoane
Legal Topics
Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Identification Parade, Onus of Proof
Criminal Law Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Murder Circumstantial Evidence Identification Parade Onus of Proof

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Manqoba Xolani Hlongwane

Defendant

Khulekani Dlamini

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused committed robbery with aggravating circumstances and murder of the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the circumstantial evidence presented by the State proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
  3. 3 Whether the identification parade and witness testimony were reliable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the State's case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, which was riddled with inconsistencies and improbabilities, particularly in the testimony of the key witness, Mr Mosia. The identification parade was not conducted in accordance with established procedures, and the witness's account was unreliable and contradictory. The timeline of events was unclear, and there was no direct evidence linking the accused to the robbery and murder. The State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offences. The evidence presented did not exclude all reasonable inferences except the guilt of the accused. Accordingly, the accused were acquitted...

Court Disposition

Both accused are found not guilty and acquitted on both counts.

Orders

  • Both accused are found not guilty and are acquitted on both counts.