South Africa Case Law

Gysman v S (A17/24)

Gysman v S (A17/24) [2024] ZAWCHC 227 (28 August 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A147/24

Judges

Slingers, Montzinger

The appeal court found that the trial court was justified in accepting the evidence of the single eyewitness and rejecting the appellant's improbable version. The cumulative circumstances—the nature and duration of the assault, the use of a knife, the position of the deceased and her mother, and the location of the wound—supported the inference that the appellant had the requisite intent to kill. Even if the trial court had erred in finding dolus directus, the evidence overwhelmingly supported a conviction on the basis of dolus eventualis. The appellant's actions demonstrated clear foresight…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Intent
• Single Witness Evidence
• Dolus Directus
• Dolus Eventualis
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 208

Mavimbela v S (AR696/17P)

Mavimbela v S (AR696/17P) [2020] ZAKZPHC 42 (21 August 2020)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR696/17P

Judges

Mngadi, Bezuidenhout

The court found that the conviction was based solely on the evidence of the complainant, a single child witness, which contained material discrepancies and unsatisfactory aspects. The trial court failed to approach this evidence with the necessary caution required by law. The medical evidence was neutral and did not corroborate the occurrence of sexual intercourse. The complainant's account was inconsistent regarding the circumstances and timing of the alleged rape, and her failure to report the incidents to various adults and professionals undermined her credibility. The court held that the…

Source excerpt

• Rape
• Single Witness Evidence
• Child Testimony
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 208
• Sexual Offences And Related Matters Amendment Act
• Standard Of Proof

Kaibe v S (A94/2019)

Kaibe v S (A94/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 179 (3 October 2019)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A94/2019

Judges

Mhlambi, Molitsoane

The appeal succeeded because the evidence of the complainant, a single child witness, was found to be unreliable and contradictory. The discrepancies between her testimony and that of her grandmother, the unexplained possession of the appellant's house keys, and the delay in reporting the alleged rape undermined her credibility. The medico-legal report and absence of DNA evidence further fortified doubt. The appellant's version was not far-fetched and was reasonably possibly true. The trial court erred in accepting the complainant's version and rejecting the appellant's. In criminal law, wher…

Source excerpt

• Rape
• Single Witness Rule
• Child Testimony
• Credibility Assessment
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 208
• Criminal Law Amendment Act Section 51

Bantom v S (CA&R 320/12)

Bantom v S (CA&R 320/12) [2013] ZAECGHC 19 (4 February 2013)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

CA&R 320/12

Judges

N G Beshe, J W Eksteen

The High Court dismissed a rape conviction appeal, finding the complainant credible and the appellant’s denial farfetched despite the lack of corroboration.

• Rape
• Single Witness Evidence
• Credibility Of Complainant
• Corroboration
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 208
• Single-witness-evidence