S v Manqindi and Another (176/92, 638/92) [1993] ZASCA 107 (2 September 1993)

S v Manqindi and Another (176/92, 638/92) [1993] ZASCA 107 (2 September 1993)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the first appellant's confession should have been excluded, as objective evidence of fresh injuries and the circumstances of his arrest and interrogation supported his claim of coercion. The trial court erred in finding that the onus was not discharged. Accordingly, the convictions and sentences against the first appellant were set aside. Regarding the second appellant, the court held that the evidence established his participation in the robbery and murder under the doctrine of common purpose and dolus eventualis. The aggravating circumstances, including the vulnerability of the victims, the brutality of the attack, and the planning involved,...

Citation
[1993] ZASCA 107
Parties
Appellant: Vuyo Manqindi; Appellant: Donald Ndlele; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 September 1993
Case Number
176/92, 638/92
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal of the first appellant is upheld; all convictions and sentences against him are set aside. The appeal of the second appellant is dismissed; his conviction and death sentence are confirmed.
Judges
Hefer, Milne, Kumleben
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Confession, Onus of Proof, Common Purpose, Dolus Eventualis, Aggravating Circumstances, Mitigating Factors
Criminal Law Admissibility of Confession Onus of Proof Common Purpose Dolus Eventualis Aggravating Circumstances Mitigating Factors

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vuyo Manqindi

Appellant

Donald Ndlele

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the confession by the first appellant was freely and voluntarily made and properly admitted into evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the first appellant discharged the onus to prove the confession was not voluntary.
  3. 3 Whether the second appellant was correctly convicted of murder on the basis of common purpose and dolus eventualis.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the first appellant's confession should have been excluded, as objective evidence of fresh injuries and the circumstances of his arrest and interrogation supported his claim of coercion. The trial court erred in finding that the onus was not discharged. Accordingly, the convictions and sentences against the first appellant were set aside. Regarding the second appellant, the court held that the evidence established his participation in the robbery and murder under the doctrine of common purpose and dolus eventualis. The aggravating circumstances, including the vulnerability of the victims, the brutality of the attack, and the planning involved,...

Court Disposition

The appeal of the first appellant is upheld; all convictions and sentences against him are set aside. The appeal of the second appellant is dismissed; his conviction and death sentence are confirmed.

Orders

  • The convictions and sentences against Vuyo Manqindi (first appellant) are set aside.
  • The appeal of Donald Ndlele (second appellant) is dismissed.