S v Makeba (510/02) [2003] ZASCA 66; 2003 (2) SACR 128 (SCA) (30 May 2003)

S v Makeba (510/02) [2003] ZASCA 66; 2003 (2) SACR 128 (SCA) (30 May 2003)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in relying on the confession of a co-accused as corroboration for the accomplice's evidence, which is expressly prohibited by section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The evidence of the single witness, Skhumbuzo, was deficient due to his contradictory statements and lack of independent corroboration implicating the appellants. The video recorded conversation was neutral and did not advance the State's case. The trial court's negative credibility findings against the appellants were unsupported by the record, and the correct test was whether their versions were reasonably possibly true. The State failed to discharge its burden...

Citation
[2003] ZASCA 66
Parties
Appellant: Nompithizelo Mary Makeba; Appellant: Somikazi Alicia Ntambula; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 May 2003
Case Number
510/02
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences set aside.
Judges
Howie, Mthiyane, Shongwe
Legal Topics
Accomplice Evidence, Corroboration, Confession Admissibility, Single Witness Rule, Murder
Criminal Law Accomplice Evidence Corroboration Confession Admissibility Single Witness Rule Murder

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nompithizelo Mary Makeba

Appellant

Somikazi Alicia Ntambula

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence of the accomplice and single witness was sufficiently clear and satisfactory to sustain a conviction.
  2. 2 Whether the use of a co-accused's confession as corroboration for the accomplice's evidence was permissible.
  3. 3 Whether the video recorded conversation was admissible and probative.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in relying on the confession of a co-accused as corroboration for the accomplice's evidence, which is expressly prohibited by section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The evidence of the single witness, Skhumbuzo, was deficient due to his contradictory statements and lack of independent corroboration implicating the appellants. The video recorded conversation was neutral and did not advance the State's case. The trial court's negative credibility findings against the appellants were unsupported by the record, and the correct test was whether their versions were reasonably possibly true. The State failed to discharge its burden...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The convictions and sentences of the first and second appellants are set aside.