S v Skhosana [2006] ZAFSHC 48 (23 November 2006)

S v Skhosana [2006] ZAFSHC 48 (23 November 2006)

The court found that the attempted murder convictions were justified because the appellant, identified by the complainants as their former employee, made repeated attempts to shoot Pretorius at close range, and only failed due to a malfunctioning firearm. The intent to kill was clear from the conduct. The attack on Mrs. Pretorius was similarly severe and intended to prevent her from identifying the appellant. The identification evidence was credible and unchallenged, as both complainants knew the appellant well and reacted naturally upon recognizing him. Regarding sentence, the court held that the offences were closely linked in time and victim, justifying concurrent sentences. The...

Citation
[2006] ZAFSHC 48
Parties
Appellant: Boontjie Skhosana; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 November 2006
Case Number
A28/2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against convictions and individual sentences dismissed; order regarding concurrency and effective term of imprisonment set aside and replaced.
Judges
H.M. Musi, M.B. Molemela
Legal Topics
Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances, Attempted Murder, Sentencing Concurrency, Identity of Accused
Criminal Law Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances Attempted Murder Sentencing Concurrency Identity of Accused

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

Parties

Boontjie Skhosana

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the convictions for attempted murder were competent given the facts.
  2. 2 Whether the identity of the appellant as the perpetrator was sufficiently established.
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed and their cumulative effect were appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the attempted murder convictions were justified because the appellant, identified by the complainants as their former employee, made repeated attempts to shoot Pretorius at close range, and only failed due to a malfunctioning firearm. The intent to kill was clear from the conduct. The attack on Mrs. Pretorius was similarly severe and intended to prevent her from identifying the appellant. The identification evidence was credible and unchallenged, as both complainants knew the appellant well and reacted naturally upon recognizing him. Regarding sentence, the court held that the offences were closely linked in time and victim, justifying concurrent sentences. The...

Court Disposition

Appeal against convictions and individual sentences dismissed; order regarding concurrency and effective term of imprisonment set aside and replaced.

Orders

  • The appeal against the convictions and the sentences imposed on each individual count is dismissed.
  • The order relating to the concurrent running of the sentences and the effective term of imprisonment is set aside and replaced.