S v Lenting and Others (CC08/2018) [2025] ZAWCHC 341 (11 August 2025)

S v Lenting and Others (CC08/2018) [2025] ZAWCHC 341 (11 August 2025)

The Court found that Delano Saptoe was a co-accused of accused 3 and 14 at the time he made the warning statement in the lower court. The statement was made after the alleged offence and did not advance a common purpose; it was a narrative statement recounting past events. The statement did not qualify as an executive statement under the common law exception and thus could not be admitted against accused 3 and 14. Furthermore, the statement was taken in violation of Saptoe's constitutional right to legal representation, as he requested a lawyer before giving the statement but was denied one. The deliberate infringement of this right rendered the statement inadmissible. The application by...

Citation
[2025] ZAWCHC 341
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Elton Lenting and 19 Others; Defendant: Accused 3 (Lorenzo Coetzee); Defendant: Accused 14 (Wandisile)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 August 2025
Case Number
CC08/2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Application / Application for Admission of Hearsay Evidence During Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed. The warning statement of Delano Saptoe is inadmissible against accused 3 and 14.
Judges
Lekhuleni
Legal Topics
Hearsay Evidence, Admissibility of Warning Statement, Co Accused Statements, Constitutional Right to Legal Representation, Executive Vs Narrative Statement, Law of Evidence Amendment Act
Criminal Law Hearsay Evidence Admissibility of Warning Statement Co Accused Statements Constitutional Right to Legal Representation Executive Vs Narrative Statement Law of Evidence Amendment Act

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Elton Lenting and 19 Others

Respondent

Accused 3 (Lorenzo Coetzee)

Defendant

Accused 14 (Wandisile)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law Application / Application for Admission of Hearsay Evidence During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a warning statement made by a deceased co-accused in a prior proceeding is admissible against accused 3 and 14 in the current trial.
  2. 2 Whether the statement qualifies as an executive statement under the common law exception to hearsay exclusion.
  3. 3 Whether the statement was taken in violation of the deceased's constitutional right to legal representation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that Delano Saptoe was a co-accused of accused 3 and 14 at the time he made the warning statement in the lower court. The statement was made after the alleged offence and did not advance a common purpose; it was a narrative statement recounting past events. The statement did not qualify as an executive statement under the common law exception and thus could not be admitted against accused 3 and 14. Furthermore, the statement was taken in violation of Saptoe's constitutional right to legal representation, as he requested a lawyer before giving the statement but was denied one. The deliberate infringement of this right rendered the statement inadmissible. The application by...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. The warning statement of Delano Saptoe is inadmissible against accused 3 and 14.

Orders

  • The State's application for admission of the warning statement of Delano Saptoe against accused 3 and 14 is dismissed.