S v Ntshaba (57/2022) [2022] ZAECGHC 3 (7 February 2022)

S v Ntshaba (57/2022) [2022] ZAECGHC 3 (7 February 2022)

The court found that all three accused were guilty of murder, acting intentionally and unlawfully in furtherance of a common purpose. The evidence established that accused 3, Faniso, was not compelled by necessity or threat to participate in the murder; her version of compulsion was not reasonably possibly true and contradicted her own prior statement and conduct. The court accepted the testimony of accused 1 and 2, as well as the statement to Captain Klaas, as credible and reliable. The murder was not planned or premeditated, but rather impulsive and executed shortly after the decision was made, following heavy alcohol consumption. The requirements for common purpose liability were met,...

Citation
[2022] ZAECGHC 3
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Themba Ntshaba; Defendant: Nonceba Kwakwa; Defendant: Nosakuthethwa Faniso
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2022
Case Number
57/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Merits and Verdict
Outcome
All three accused are found guilty of murder.
Judges
Govindjee
Legal Topics
Murder, Common Purpose, Necessity Defence, Intoxication, Premeditation, Admissibility of Statements
Criminal Law Murder Common Purpose Necessity Defence Intoxication Premeditation Admissibility of Statements

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Themba Ntshaba

Defendant

Nonceba Kwakwa

Defendant

Nosakuthethwa Faniso

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Merits and Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused are guilty of murder under the doctrine of common purpose.
  2. 2 Whether the defence of necessity or compulsion applies to accused 3.
  3. 3 Whether the murder was planned or premeditated.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all three accused were guilty of murder, acting intentionally and unlawfully in furtherance of a common purpose. The evidence established that accused 3, Faniso, was not compelled by necessity or threat to participate in the murder; her version of compulsion was not reasonably possibly true and contradicted her own prior statement and conduct. The court accepted the testimony of accused 1 and 2, as well as the statement to Captain Klaas, as credible and reliable. The murder was not planned or premeditated, but rather impulsive and executed shortly after the decision was made, following heavy alcohol consumption. The requirements for common purpose liability were met,...

Court Disposition

All three accused are found guilty of murder.

Orders

  • Accused no. 1, 2 and 3 are all found guilty of the crime of murder.