S v Ratau (CC46/2013) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 64; 2023 (2) SACR 40 (MM) (1 August 2022)

S v Ratau (CC46/2013) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 64; 2023 (2) SACR 40 (MM) (1 August 2022)

The court found the State witnesses credible and their evidence consistent, while Mr Ratau's version was implausible and self-serving. The evidence established that Mr Ratau and the deceased jointly attacked the police officers with the intention to rob them of their service pistols, acting in concert and with foresight of the risk of death or serious injury. The doctrine of common purpose applied, making Mr Ratau liable for the murder of his accomplice, who was shot and killed by a police officer during the attempted robbery. The attack was premeditated, as evidenced by the coordinated actions and disregard for the consequences, satisfying the requirements for premeditated murder under...

Citation
[2022] ZAMPMBHC 64
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: Johannes Walter Ratau
Court
Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 August 2022
Case Number
CC46/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment
Outcome
Mr Ratau is found guilty of both attempted robbery and premeditated murder as charged.
Judges
Roelofse
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Premeditated Murder, Dolus Eventualis, Minimum Sentences Act, Attempted Robbery
Criminal Law Common Purpose Premeditated Murder Dolus Eventualis Minimum Sentences Act Attempted Robbery

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Johannes Walter Ratau

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Ratau attempted to rob the police officers of their service pistols.
  2. 2 Whether Mr Ratau is guilty of the premeditated murder of his accomplice under the doctrine of common purpose.
  3. 3 Whether the murder was premeditated as contemplated by section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the State witnesses credible and their evidence consistent, while Mr Ratau's version was implausible and self-serving. The evidence established that Mr Ratau and the deceased jointly attacked the police officers with the intention to rob them of their service pistols, acting in concert and with foresight of the risk of death or serious injury. The doctrine of common purpose applied, making Mr Ratau liable for the murder of his accomplice, who was shot and killed by a police officer during the attempted robbery. The attack was premeditated, as evidenced by the coordinated actions and disregard for the consequences, satisfying the requirements for premeditated murder under...

Court Disposition

Mr Ratau is found guilty of both attempted robbery and premeditated murder as charged.

Orders

  • Mr Ratau is convicted on both counts: attempted robbery and premeditated murder.
  • The matter is referred for sentencing in accordance with section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997.