S v Ratel (K/S 17A/2023)
S v Ratel (K/S 17A/2023) [2024] ZANCHC 75 (21 June 2024)
The court found that the accused's alibi was vague, unsubstantiated, and disclosed late, and was contradicted by credible witness testimony and forensic evidence. The extra-curial statements made by Daisy Plaatjies and Gladys Ratel to the investigating officer were admitted as hearsay under s 3(1)(c) of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act, as they were made voluntarily, in a language understood by the declarants, and were pivotal to the State's case. The cumulative effect of the evidence, including the accused's conduct, utterances, and the frequency of calls between his mother and sister, esta…
Source excerpt
- Murder
- Assault Gbh
- Hearsay Evidence
- Law Of Evidence Amendment Act
- Alibi Defence
- Hostile Witnesses