S v Majosi and Others (446/90) [1991] ZASCA 120 (26 September 1991)

S v Majosi and Others (446/90) [1991] ZASCA 120 (26 September 1991)

The court found that all appellants participated in a planned armed robbery, knowingly equipped themselves with firearms, and must have foreseen the risk of fatal violence. The confessions and conduct after the crime demonstrated acceptance of the consequences. Appellant No. 2 was convicted of murder on the basis of dolus eventualis, as he foresaw the possibility of death but did not directly participate. Appellant No. 4 was found to be a direct co-perpetrator, passing the gun to Appellant No. 5, who then shot the deceased. Appellant No. 5 was the actual shooter, acting with direct intent. The death penalty was confirmed for Appellant No. 5 due to the brutality and lack of mitigating...

Citation
[1991] ZASCA 120
Parties
Appellant: Simon Bongani Majosi; Appellant: Michael Zondi; Appellant: Mngxobeni Sokhela; Appellant: Wilton Nolzimande; Appellant: Thulani Z M Magubane; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 September 1991
Case Number
446/90
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences From the Witwatersrand Local Division
Outcome
Appeals against convictions for murder by Appellants Nos. 2 and 4 dismissed. Death sentences for Appellants Nos. 2 and 4 set aside and replaced with imprisonment. Death sentence for Appellant No. 5 confirmed. Appeals against sentences for robbery dismissed.
Judges
Smalberger, Nienaber, Kriegler
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Armed Robbery, Murder, Dolus Eventualis, Death Penalty, Sentencing Guidelines
Criminal Law Common Purpose Armed Robbery Murder Dolus Eventualis Death Penalty Sentencing Guidelines

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Bongani Majosi

Appellant

Michael Zondi

Appellant

Mngxobeni Sokhela

Appellant

Wilton Nolzimande

Appellant

Thulani Z M Magubane

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences From the Witwatersrand Local Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the confessions of the appellants were sufficient to establish criminal liability under the doctrine of common purpose.
  2. 2 Whether the convictions for murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances were justified based on the evidence and confessions.
  3. 3 Whether the imposition of the death penalty was appropriate under the amended law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all appellants participated in a planned armed robbery, knowingly equipped themselves with firearms, and must have foreseen the risk of fatal violence. The confessions and conduct after the crime demonstrated acceptance of the consequences. Appellant No. 2 was convicted of murder on the basis of dolus eventualis, as he foresaw the possibility of death but did not directly participate. Appellant No. 4 was found to be a direct co-perpetrator, passing the gun to Appellant No. 5, who then shot the deceased. Appellant No. 5 was the actual shooter, acting with direct intent. The death penalty was confirmed for Appellant No. 5 due to the brutality and lack of mitigating...

Court Disposition

Appeals against convictions for murder by Appellants Nos. 2 and 4 dismissed. Death sentences for Appellants Nos. 2 and 4 set aside and replaced with imprisonment. Death sentence for Appellant No. 5 confirmed. Appeals against sentences for robbery dismissed.

Orders

  • First appellant's appeal against sentence on count 2 dismissed.
  • Second appellant's appeal against conviction on count 1 dismissed; death sentence set aside and replaced with 15 years imprisonment; appeal against sentence on count 2 dismissed, with 8 years to run concurrently with count 1.