S v Mafumo en 'n Ander (469/92, 468/92) [1994] ZASCA 168 (24 November 1994)

S v Mafumo en 'n Ander (469/92, 468/92) [1994] ZASCA 168 (24 November 1994)

The court found that both appellants acted with a common purpose to murder the deceased, motivated solely by financial gain, and that the evidence overwhelmingly supported their conviction. The first appellant's claim of compulsion was contradicted by credible testimony and his own conduct. The trial court's findings were upheld. Regarding sentence, the court held that contract killings are particularly abhorrent and generally warrant the death penalty unless exceptional circumstances exist. In this case, no such circumstances were present, as both appellants were adults, had no personal grievance against the deceased, and committed the murder for monetary reward. However, the...

Citation
[1994] ZASCA 168
Parties
Appellant: Moshe John Mafumo; Appellant: Walter Mokoena; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 November 1994
Case Number
469/92, 468/92
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeals against conviction are dismissed. The appeals against sentence are postponed pending the Constitutional Court's decision.
Judges
E M Grosskopf, Eksteen, Harms
Legal Topics
Murder, Contract Killing, Sentencing, Appeal Procedure, Diminished Responsibility
Criminal Law Murder Contract Killing Sentencing Appeal Procedure Diminished Responsibility

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moshe John Mafumo

Appellant

Walter Mokoena

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction of both appellants for murder was justified on the evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the death sentence was the only appropriate sentence in the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the first appellant acted under duress or compulsion by the second appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both appellants acted with a common purpose to murder the deceased, motivated solely by financial gain, and that the evidence overwhelmingly supported their conviction. The first appellant's claim of compulsion was contradicted by credible testimony and his own conduct. The trial court's findings were upheld. Regarding sentence, the court held that contract killings are particularly abhorrent and generally warrant the death penalty unless exceptional circumstances exist. In this case, no such circumstances were present, as both appellants were adults, had no personal grievance against the deceased, and committed the murder for monetary reward. However, the...

Court Disposition

The appeals against conviction are dismissed. The appeals against sentence are postponed pending the Constitutional Court's decision.

Orders

  • The appeals of both accused against their convictions are dismissed.
  • The finalization of their appeals against the death sentences imposed is postponed to a date to be determined by the Registrar in consultation with the Chief Justice.