S v Mashego (446/94) [1995] ZASCA 60 (25 May 1995)

S v Mashego (446/94) [1995] ZASCA 60 (25 May 1995)

The court found that the appellant's version of events was not reasonably possibly true and was contradicted by the credible evidence of Kadiake and Mavuso. The appellant was present, armed, and actively participated in the tying up and removal of the victims to the bush, where they were shot. Even if he did not personally fire the shots, his conduct established liability under the doctrine of common purpose. The court held that the murder was a calculated and cold-blooded execution to eliminate witnesses to the robbery. The death sentence was deemed the only appropriate punishment, but its constitutional validity was pending before the Constitutional Court, necessitating a postponement...

Citation
[1995] ZASCA 60
Parties
Appellant: Thomas Mashego; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 May 1995
Case Number
446/94
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
The appeal against conviction for murder is dismissed. The appeal against the death sentence is postponed pending constitutional review.
Judges
E M Grosskopf, Nienaber, Marais
Legal Topics
Murder, Attempted Murder, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Common Purpose, Sentencing, Death Penalty
Criminal Law Murder Attempted Murder Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Common Purpose Sentencing Death Penalty

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Mashego

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was correctly convicted of murder under common purpose doctrine.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's version excluding his participation in the murder is reasonably possibly true.
  3. 3 Whether the death sentence imposed was appropriate and lawful.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant's version of events was not reasonably possibly true and was contradicted by the credible evidence of Kadiake and Mavuso. The appellant was present, armed, and actively participated in the tying up and removal of the victims to the bush, where they were shot. Even if he did not personally fire the shots, his conduct established liability under the doctrine of common purpose. The court held that the murder was a calculated and cold-blooded execution to eliminate witnesses to the robbery. The death sentence was deemed the only appropriate punishment, but its constitutional validity was pending before the Constitutional Court, necessitating a postponement...

Court Disposition

The appeal against conviction for murder is dismissed. The appeal against the death sentence is postponed pending constitutional review.

Orders

  • The appellant's appeal against his conviction on count 1 (murder) fails.
  • The appellant's appeal against the death sentence imposed on count 1 is postponed to a date to be determined by the Registrar of this court.