S v Makhakha (SS41/2012) [2013] ZAWCHC 118; 2014 (2) SACR 457 (WCC) (11 June 2013)

S v Makhakha (SS41/2012) [2013] ZAWCHC 118; 2014 (2) SACR 457 (WCC) (11 June 2013)

The court found that the cumulative circumstantial evidence, forensic DNA analysis, and eyewitness testimony established the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt on all counts except for rape in count 1, where only attempted rape was proven. The DNA evidence conclusively linked the accused to the crime scenes and victims, and the modus operandi in all incidents was sufficiently similar to admit similar fact evidence. The identification of the accused by the complainant was reliable and corroborated by hearsay evidence and objective facts. The accused's alibi was rejected as false and unsupported. The court held that the presence of the accused's semen on the victims' panties, combined...

Citation
[2013] ZAWCHC 118
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Sandisile Makhakha
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2013
Case Number
SS41/2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment on Merits
Outcome
The accused is found guilty of attempted rape (count 1), murder (counts 2 and 6), robbery with aggravating circumstances (count 3), attempted murder (count 4), and rape (count 5).
Judges
N P Boqwana
Legal Topics
Murder, Rape, Attempted Rape, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Attempted Murder, Dna Evidence
Criminal Law Murder Rape Attempted Rape Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Attempted Murder Dna 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Sandisile Makhakha

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was the perpetrator of the alleged crimes committed against three women in separate incidents.
  2. 2 Whether the circumstantial and forensic evidence, including DNA, proves the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
  3. 3 Whether the identification evidence and hearsay evidence are admissible and reliable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the cumulative circumstantial evidence, forensic DNA analysis, and eyewitness testimony established the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt on all counts except for rape in count 1, where only attempted rape was proven. The DNA evidence conclusively linked the accused to the crime scenes and victims, and the modus operandi in all incidents was sufficiently similar to admit similar fact evidence. The identification of the accused by the complainant was reliable and corroborated by hearsay evidence and objective facts. The accused's alibi was rejected as false and unsupported. The court held that the presence of the accused's semen on the victims' panties, combined...

Court Disposition

The accused is found guilty of attempted rape (count 1), murder (counts 2 and 6), robbery with aggravating circumstances (count 3), attempted murder (count 4), and rape (count 5).

Orders

  • Accused is found guilty of attempted rape as charged (count 1).
  • Accused is found guilty of murder as charged (count 2).