S v Qhinga and Others (CC35/2007) [2009] ZAECBHC 15 (11 March 2009)

S v Qhinga and Others (CC35/2007) [2009] ZAECBHC 15 (11 March 2009)

The court found that the first, second, third, fifth, sixth, and seventh accused acted with common purpose in committing the robbery at Newlands, using firearms to threaten and induce submission, and that their confessions and pointing out statements were admissible as evidence. The evidence established that they...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] ZAECBHC 15
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Msobomvu Qhinga; Defendant: Lungile Jamiso; Defendant: Camagu Zimela; Defendant: Mncedisi Titshala; Defendant: Luvuyo Mcaphukisi; Defendant: Lizo Lumbe; Defendant: Lindile Magi
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 March 2009
Case Number
CC35/2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Accused numbers one, two, three, five, six, and seven are found guilty as charged on counts one to six and not guilty on counts seven to ten. Accused number four is found not guilty on all counts.
Judges
A E B Dhlodhlo
Legal Topics
Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Attempted Murder, Unlawful Possession of Firearm, Minimum Sentences, Confession Admissibility
Criminal Law Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Attempted Murder Unlawful Possession of Firearm Minimum Sentences Confession Admissibility

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Msobomvu Qhinga

Defendant

Lungile Jamiso

Defendant

Camagu Zimela

Defendant

Mncedisi Titshala

Defendant

Luvuyo Mcaphukisi

Defendant

Lizo Lumbe

Defendant

Lindile Magi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused are guilty of robbery with aggravating circumstances, attempted murder, and unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition.
  2. 2 Whether the confessions and pointing out statements made by the accused are admissible as evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the accused acted with common purpose in the commission of the offences.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first, second, third, fifth, sixth, and seventh accused acted with common purpose in committing the robbery at Newlands, using firearms to threaten and induce submission, and that their confessions and pointing out statements were admissible as evidence. The evidence established that they fired shots, shot a security guard, robbed paymasters and security guards of money, firearms, and a vehicle, and escaped in the stolen van. The court rejected the alibi defences as not credible and found that the accused's rights to legal representation were properly explained. The fourth accused's involvement was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, and he was acquitted on all...

Court Disposition

Accused numbers one, two, three, five, six, and seven are found guilty as charged on counts one to six and not guilty on counts seven to ten. Accused number four is found not guilty on all counts.

Orders

  • Accused numbers one, two, three, five, six, and seven are convicted on counts one, two, three, four, five, and six.
  • Accused numbers one, two, three, five, six, and seven are acquitted on counts seven, eight, nine, and ten.