Rangaka and Another v S (A10/2016)
Rangaka and Another v S (A10/2016) [2017] ZAFSHC 59 (31 March 2017)
The court found that the contradictions in the State witnesses' evidence were not material and did not undermine the reliability of the prosecution's case. The evidence, when considered in its totality, established a consistent thread implicating the first appellant in the offence of corruption. The trap set by the police was authorized and did not go beyond providing an opportunity to commit the offence; the evidence obtained was admissible and did not render the trial unfair. The appellant's version was found to be improbable and not reasonably possibly true, particularly regarding the circ…
Source excerpt
- Corruption
- Criminal Procedure Act Section 252a
- Trap Evidence
- Admissibility Of Evidence
- Contradictory Witness Testimony