S v Madolwana (CC10/2021) [2021] ZAECGHC 63 (28 April 2021)

S v Madolwana (CC10/2021) [2021] ZAECGHC 63 (28 April 2021)

The court found the complainant in count 1 credible, her evidence consistent and corroborated by medical and circumstantial evidence. The accused's version was tailored, introduced new facts only under oath, and was not reasonably possibly true. Even if consent was argued, it was vitiated by fraudulent misrepresentation regarding payment. In count 2, material contradictions and inconsistencies in the complainant's and her mother's evidence created doubt, and the accused benefited from that doubt, resulting in acquittal. In count 3, the court accepted the medical evidence and eyewitness testimony, finding the accused's version opportunistic and contradicted by the facts. The only...

Citation
[2021] ZAECGHC 63
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Melikhaya Michael Madolwana
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 April 2021
Case Number
CC10/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
The accused is found guilty of rape as charged on counts 1 and 3, and acquitted on count 2.
Judges
Rusi
Legal Topics
Rape, Consent, Sexual Offences and Related Matters Amendment Act, Minimum Sentences, Credibility of Witnesses, Evaluation of Evidence
Criminal Law Rape Consent Sexual Offences and Related Matters Amendment Act Minimum Sentences Credibility of Witnesses Evaluation of Evidence

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Melikhaya Michael Madolwana

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainants in counts 1 and 2 consented to sexual intercourse with the accused.
  2. 2 Whether the accused raped and assaulted the complainant in count 3.
  3. 3 Whether the accused's version is reasonably possibly true in light of the evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the complainant in count 1 credible, her evidence consistent and corroborated by medical and circumstantial evidence. The accused's version was tailored, introduced new facts only under oath, and was not reasonably possibly true. Even if consent was argued, it was vitiated by fraudulent misrepresentation regarding payment. In count 2, material contradictions and inconsistencies in the complainant's and her mother's evidence created doubt, and the accused benefited from that doubt, resulting in acquittal. In count 3, the court accepted the medical evidence and eyewitness testimony, finding the accused's version opportunistic and contradicted by the facts. The only...

Court Disposition

The accused is found guilty of rape as charged on counts 1 and 3, and acquitted on count 2.

Orders

  • On count 1, the accused is found guilty of rape as charged.
  • On count 2, the accused is acquitted.