S v Tiemie and Others (194/85) [1985] ZASCA 131 (27 November 1985)

S v Tiemie and Others (194/85) [1985] ZASCA 131 (27 November 1985)

The court held that each accused was party to a common purpose to commit robbery and, on the evidence, must have subjectively foreseen the possibility that fatal violence could be inflicted on the victim in the execution of that purpose. The accused were reckless as to whether death ensued, and the intention to kill was imputed to each. The trial court's findings on credibility and participation were upheld. However, regarding accused No 2, the appellate court found that his personality defects and susceptibility to influence, as well as evidence of mental instability, were not adequately considered in assessing extenuating circumstances. The court concluded that No 2's moral...

Citation
[1985] ZASCA 131
Parties
Appellant: Dawid Tiemie; Appellant: Ismael Loff; Appellant: Johannes Tiemie; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 November 1985
Case Number
194/85
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence for Murder and Robbery
Outcome
Appeals of accused No 1 and No 3 dismissed. Appeal of accused No 2 upheld in part; verdict and sentence on Count 2 altered to murder with extenuating circumstances and 12 years imprisonment, concurrent with sentence on Count 1.
Judges
Trengove, Van Heerden, Nicholas
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Murder, Extenuating Circumstances, Housebreaking, Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
Criminal Law Common Purpose Murder Extenuating Circumstances Housebreaking Robbery With 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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dawid Tiemie

Appellant

Ismael Loff

Appellant

Johannes Tiemie

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence for Murder and Robbery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether each accused had the requisite subjective foresight for murder under the doctrine of common purpose.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in finding no extenuating circumstances for accused No 2.
  3. 3 Whether the convictions and sentences for murder and robbery were justified on the evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that each accused was party to a common purpose to commit robbery and, on the evidence, must have subjectively foreseen the possibility that fatal violence could be inflicted on the victim in the execution of that purpose. The accused were reckless as to whether death ensued, and the intention to kill was imputed to each. The trial court's findings on credibility and participation were upheld. However, regarding accused No 2, the appellate court found that his personality defects and susceptibility to influence, as well as evidence of mental instability, were not adequately considered in assessing extenuating circumstances. The court concluded that No 2's moral...

Court Disposition

Appeals of accused No 1 and No 3 dismissed. Appeal of accused No 2 upheld in part; verdict and sentence on Count 2 altered to murder with extenuating circumstances and 12 years imprisonment, concurrent with sentence on Count 1.

Orders

  • Appeals of accused No 1 and No 3 are dismissed.
  • Appeal of accused No 2 is upheld in part.