S v Masondo and Another (81/88) [1992] ZASCA 7 (5 March 1992)

S v Masondo and Another (81/88) [1992] ZASCA 7 (5 March 1992)

The court found that the murder of Mrs Madonsela was premeditated, deliberate, and executed in a cruel and callous manner. The appellants had ample opportunity to reconsider their plan during the hour-long journey before the murder, yet proceeded with the killing of an innocent eyewitness to a previous murder. The consumption of alcohol by the appellants did not play a significant role in the commission of the second murder and was not accepted as a mitigating factor. The interests of society and the purposes of punishment, including deterrence and retribution, outweighed the possibility of rehabilitation. The death sentence was deemed the only proper sentence for each appellant on count...

Citation
[1992] ZASCA 7
Parties
Appellant: Henry Masondo; Appellant: Sampie Majola; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 1992
Case Number
81/88
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence of Death Following Conviction for Murder and Rape
Outcome
Both appeals are dismissed and the death sentence of each appellant is confirmed.
Judges
Van Heerden, F H Grosskopf, Van Coller
Legal Topics
Murder, Rape, Death Sentence, Mitigating Factors, Criminal Law Amendment Act, Premeditation
Criminal Law Murder Rape Death Sentence Mitigating Factors Criminal Law Amendment Act Premeditation

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Henry Masondo

Appellant

Sampie Majola

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence of Death Following Conviction for Murder and Rape

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the death sentence imposed on each appellant for the murder of Mrs Madonsela should be confirmed under the new sentencing regime.
  2. 2 Whether the consumption of alcohol by the appellants constituted a mitigating factor in respect of the second murder.
  3. 3 Whether the killing of Mrs Madonsela was premeditated and deliberate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the murder of Mrs Madonsela was premeditated, deliberate, and executed in a cruel and callous manner. The appellants had ample opportunity to reconsider their plan during the hour-long journey before the murder, yet proceeded with the killing of an innocent eyewitness to a previous murder. The consumption of alcohol by the appellants did not play a significant role in the commission of the second murder and was not accepted as a mitigating factor. The interests of society and the purposes of punishment, including deterrence and retribution, outweighed the possibility of rehabilitation. The death sentence was deemed the only proper sentence for each appellant on count...

Court Disposition

Both appeals are dismissed and the death sentence of each appellant is confirmed.

Orders

  • The death sentence imposed on each appellant for the murder of Mrs Madonsela is confirmed in terms of section 19(12)(b)(i) of Act 107 of 1990.