S v Nogodama (CC20/2017) [2017] ZAECPEHC 49 (13 October 2017)

S v Nogodama (CC20/2017) [2017] ZAECPEHC 49 (13 October 2017)

The court found the complainants to be credible and consistent witnesses whose evidence was corroborated by medical findings and circumstantial facts. The accused's version was rejected as false, improbable, and inconsistent with the evidence. The complainants' immediate reporting, abandonment of studies, and the actions of Ms M.'s brother further supported the State's case. The medical evidence confirmed forceful, non-consensual sexual intercourse. The accused's denial and claims of consensual sex were not reasonably possibly true. The State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused kidnapped, robbed, and raped the complainants, and pointed an object likely to be believed as a...

Citation
[2017] ZAECPEHC 49
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Kwanele Nogodama
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 October 2017
Case Number
CC20/2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment
Outcome
The accused is found guilty on all counts: kidnapping, robbery with aggravating circumstances, three counts of rape, and pointing of anything likely to be believed as a firearm.
Judges
M Makaula
Legal Topics
Rape, Kidnapping, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Pointing of Firearm, Credibility of Witnesses, Medical Evidence in Sexual Offences
Criminal Law Rape Kidnapping Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Pointing of Firearm Credibility of Witnesses Medical Evidence in Sexual Offences

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Kwanele Nogodama

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused kidnapped the complainants.
  2. 2 Whether the accused robbed the complainants with aggravating circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the accused raped the complainants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the complainants to be credible and consistent witnesses whose evidence was corroborated by medical findings and circumstantial facts. The accused's version was rejected as false, improbable, and inconsistent with the evidence. The complainants' immediate reporting, abandonment of studies, and the actions of Ms M.'s brother further supported the State's case. The medical evidence confirmed forceful, non-consensual sexual intercourse. The accused's denial and claims of consensual sex were not reasonably possibly true. The State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused kidnapped, robbed, and raped the complainants, and pointed an object likely to be believed as a...

Court Disposition

The accused is found guilty on all counts: kidnapping, robbery with aggravating circumstances, three counts of rape, and pointing of anything likely to be believed as a firearm.

Orders

  • The accused is convicted on Count 1: Kidnapping.
  • The accused is convicted on Count 2: Robbery with aggravating circumstances.