S v Montle and Others (SS80/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 559 (11 June 2024)

S v Montle and Others (SS80/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 559 (11 June 2024)

The court found that, at the close of the State's case, there was sufficient evidence implicating all seven accused in the murder counts, primarily through the testimony of Ms. Mosola, who identified the accused as part of the group that arrived at the dumpsite and participated in the shooting. The court accepted that, although the reliability of her identification was challenged due to her eyesight, her evidence was adequate for the purposes of a prima facie case at this stage. The doctrine of common purpose was applicable, as the accused acted together in furtherance of the offences. However, regarding the attempted murder counts, the court found no evidence or admission linking the...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 559
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Nthole Montle; Defendant: Motlalentoa Nkwe; Defendant: Gerald Johane; Defendant: Thokwane Palo; Defendant: Tshele Lesala; Defendant: Teboho Maleleka; Defendant: Tefelo Makgotla
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2024
Case Number
SS80/2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Section 174 Discharge Application
Outcome
Discharge application refused on murder counts; granted on attempted murder counts.
Judges
R Strydom
Legal Topics
Section 174 Discharge, Common Purpose, Murder, Attempted Murder, Identification Evidence
Criminal Law Section 174 Discharge Common Purpose Murder Attempted Murder Identification 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Nthole Montle

Defendant

Motlalentoa Nkwe

Defendant

Gerald Johane

Defendant

Thokwane Palo

Defendant

Tshele Lesala

Defendant

Teboho Maleleka

Defendant

Tefelo Makgotla

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Section 174 Discharge Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is evidence upon which a reasonable court may convict the accused on the murder counts.
  2. 2 Whether the accused should be discharged on the attempted murder counts due to lack of evidence linking them to the complainants.
  3. 3 Whether the doctrine of common purpose applies to the conduct of the accused at the dumpsite.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, at the close of the State's case, there was sufficient evidence implicating all seven accused in the murder counts, primarily through the testimony of Ms. Mosola, who identified the accused as part of the group that arrived at the dumpsite and participated in the shooting. The court accepted that, although the reliability of her identification was challenged due to her eyesight, her evidence was adequate for the purposes of a prima facie case at this stage. The doctrine of common purpose was applicable, as the accused acted together in furtherance of the offences. However, regarding the attempted murder counts, the court found no evidence or admission linking the...

Court Disposition

Discharge application refused on murder counts; granted on attempted murder counts.

Orders

  • The discharge application in respect of counts 1, 2, 3, and 4 (murder) is refused for all seven accused.
  • All seven accused are discharged on counts 5, 6, 7, and 8 (attempted murder).