S v Salzwedel and Others (273/98) [1999] ZASCA 93; [2000] 1 All SA 229 (A); 2000 (1) SA 786 (SCA) (29 November 1999)

S v Salzwedel and Others (273/98) [1999] ZASCA 93; [2000] 1 All SA 229 (A); 2000 (1) SA 786 (SCA) (29 November 1999)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court had over-emphasized the respondents' personal circumstances and racial conditioning while underestimating the gravity and aggravating circumstances of the murder, which was racially motivated and committed with extreme brutality. The trial court's sentence, which did not require any actual imprisonment if conditions were met, was disturbingly inappropriate and failed to reflect the seriousness of the offence, the interests of the community, and the constitutional repudiation of racism. The appellate court held that a substantial term of imprisonment was necessary both as retribution and as a deterrent, and to send a clear message that...

Citation
[1999] ZASCA 93
Parties
Appellant: The State; Respondent: Cyril Salzwedel; Respondent: Darryl Ivor Lottering; Respondent: Charl Justin Lottering; Respondent: Barry Quintin Lottering
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 1999
Case Number
273/98
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld; sentences of the trial court set aside and replaced with substantial terms of imprisonment.
Judges
Mahomed, Smalberger, Olivier, Melunsky, Mpati
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing Discretion, Racial Motivation, Dolus Eventualis, Aggravating Circumstances
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Discretion Racial Motivation Dolus Eventualis Aggravating Circumstances

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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Appellant

Cyril Salzwedel

Respondent

Darryl Ivor Lottering

Respondent

Charl Justin Lottering

Respondent

Barry Quintin Lottering

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed for murder were disturbingly inappropriate and warranted appellate interference.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' personal circumstances and racial conditioning should mitigate the sentence for a racially motivated murder.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of the community and the gravity of the offence were properly balanced against the respondents' circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court had over-emphasized the respondents' personal circumstances and racial conditioning while underestimating the gravity and aggravating circumstances of the murder, which was racially motivated and committed with extreme brutality. The trial court's sentence, which did not require any actual imprisonment if conditions were met, was disturbingly inappropriate and failed to reflect the seriousness of the offence, the interests of the community, and the constitutional repudiation of racism. The appellate court held that a substantial term of imprisonment was necessary both as retribution and as a deterrent, and to send a clear message that...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; sentences of the trial court set aside and replaced with substantial terms of imprisonment.

Orders

  • Each accused is sentenced to twelve years imprisonment.
  • Two years of the sentence in respect of each accused is suspended on condition that each accused pays into the Guardian’s Fund the sum of R3000 for the benefit of the minor children of the deceased, in monthly instalments of R50 commencing not later than 7 August 1997. The obligation to pay such instalments shall...