S v Slender (CC59/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 30 (11 February 2020)

S v Slender (CC59/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 30 (11 February 2020)

The court found that the accused fired shots at retreating students after the initial warning shots had already dispersed them, and that the fatal bullet was conclusively traced to his rifle. The accused's denial was rejected as not reasonably possibly true, given the overwhelming forensic and eyewitness evidence. The court held that the accused, as a trained police officer, must have subjectively foreseen the possibility of death or serious injury resulting from firing in the direction of people, and acted recklessly with such foresight. The conduct was unlawful and unjustified, and the accused was found to have acted with intention in the form of dolus eventualis. He was found guilty of...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 30
Parties
Applicant: The State; Defendant: John Slender
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 February 2020
Case Number
CC59/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment
Outcome
The accused is found guilty on counts 1 (murder) and 2 (attempted murder) as charged. He is acquitted on counts 3 and 4 (Firearms Control Act contraventions).
Judges
Johnson
Legal Topics
Murder, Attempted Murder, Firearms Control Act, Dolus Eventualis, Unlawful Killing
Criminal Law Murder Attempted Murder Firearms Control Act Dolus Eventualis Unlawful Killing

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

John Slender

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused unlawfully and intentionally killed Andries Monareng by shooting him with a firearm.
  2. 2 Whether the accused attempted to kill Wiseman Qwabe by shooting him with a firearm.
  3. 3 Whether the accused contravened sections 120(6)(A) and 120(3)(B) of the Firearms Control Act by pointing and discharging a firearm in a manner likely to endanger safety.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the accused fired shots at retreating students after the initial warning shots had already dispersed them, and that the fatal bullet was conclusively traced to his rifle. The accused's denial was rejected as not reasonably possibly true, given the overwhelming forensic and eyewitness evidence. The court held that the accused, as a trained police officer, must have subjectively foreseen the possibility of death or serious injury resulting from firing in the direction of people, and acted recklessly with such foresight. The conduct was unlawful and unjustified, and the accused was found to have acted with intention in the form of dolus eventualis. He was found guilty of...

Court Disposition

The accused is found guilty on counts 1 (murder) and 2 (attempted murder) as charged. He is acquitted on counts 3 and 4 (Firearms Control Act contraventions).

Orders

  • The accused is convicted of murder (count 1) and attempted murder (count 2).
  • The accused is acquitted on counts 3 and 4.