South Africa Case Law

Lesetla v S (A66/2024)

Lesetla v S (A66/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 366 (14 November 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A66/2024

Judges

Reinders, Nemavhidi

The court found the complainant's evidence to be trustworthy, consistent, and corroborated by medical and aliunde evidence, despite her young age and the absence of other direct witnesses. The appellant's alibi was raised late, not put to witnesses, and lacked credibility. The trial court correctly applied the principles governing single witness evidence and the double cautionary rule, as well as the statutory prohibition against treating sexual offence complainant evidence with undue caution. No substantial and compelling circumstances existed to justify deviation from the prescribed minimum…

Source excerpt

• Rape Of A Child
• Single Witness Evidence
• Double Cautionary Rule
• Minimum Sentencing
• Alibi Defence

Motsumi v S (CA85/2018)

Motsumi v S (CA85/2018) [2024] ZANWHC 52 (28 February 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CA85/2018

Judges

Petersen, Williams

Appeal against a life sentence for raping a five-year-old child dismissed. The court found no substantial and compelling circumstances to depart from the minimum sentence.

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Sentencing Discretion
• Appeal Procedure
• Child-rape

Sebotsa v S (A108/2022)

Sebotsa v S (A108/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 226 (7 June 2023)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A108/2022

Judges

Daniso, Barry

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a life sentence for raping a 12-year-old girl, finding no substantial and compelling circumstances to justify deviation.

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Mitigation Of Sentence
• Victim Impact Statement
• Child-rape

Mathumbu v S (A34/ 2021)

Mathumbu v S (A34/ 2021) [2023] ZAMPMBHC 32 (30 May 2023)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

A34/2021

Judges

Ratshibvumo, Greyling-Coetzer

The High Court dismissed Lucas Mathumbu’s appeal against his rape conviction and life sentence for raping a seven-year-old child.

• Rape Of A Child
• Mandatory Sentencing
• Cautionary Rule For Child Witnesses
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Child-rape
• Life-imprisonment

Matladi v S (A36/2022)

Matladi v S (A36/2022) [2022] ZAFSHC 288 (24 August 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A36/2022

Judges

Daniso, Khooe

Appeal against rape conviction and life sentence confirmed. The High Court found the child complainant credible, the appellant unreliable, and no basis to depart from the prescribed sentence.

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Child Witness Evidence
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Child-rape
• Minimum-sentencing

Khoza v S (AR60/2020)

Khoza v S (AR60/2020) [2022] ZAKZPHC 30 (20 July 2022)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR60/2020

Judges

Mossop, Reddi

The court found that none of the appellant's personal circumstances, including age, injuries, marital status, unemployment, or family responsibilities, constituted substantial and compelling circumstances justifying deviation from the prescribed minimum sentence. The appellant's age was considered an aggravating factor given his position of trust in the community. The absence of additional violence was not a mitigating factor under the law. The aggravating factors, including premeditation, the age of the victim, the presence of another child, and lack of remorse, outweighed the sole mitigatin…

Source excerpt

• Minimum Sentences
• Rape Of A Child
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Sentencing Discretion

Mashego v S (A05 / 2021)

Mashego v S (A05 / 2021) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 9 (18 February 2022)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

A05 / 2021

Judges

TV Ratshibvumo, MF Legodi

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a rape conviction and life sentence for rape of a child under 16, finding the evidence proved penetration and no basis to disturb sentence.

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Appeal Procedure
• Child-rape

Nkabinde v S (A52/2021)

Nkabinde v S (A52/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 572 (31 August 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A52/2021

Judges

Noncembu, Makhoba

The court found that the seriousness of the offence, the interests of society, and the protection of children far outweigh the personal circumstances of the appellant. The appellant's previous convictions for sexual offences against children, his lack of rehabilitation, and the community's fear for their children's safety demonstrate that he poses a serious danger to society. The time spent in custody awaiting trial is only one factor and does not constitute a substantial and compelling circumstance justifying deviation from the prescribed minimum sentence. The regional magistrate exercised h…

Source excerpt

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Sentencing Discretion
• Rehabilitation Vs Deterrence

Hadebe v S (A282/2020)

Hadebe v S (A282/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 341 (24 May 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A282/2020

Judges

Mokose, Strijodom

The court found that the complainant's evidence, although that of a single witness, was credible and corroborated by DNA evidence linking the appellant to the crime. The Magistrate correctly applied the cautionary rule and found no motive for the complainant to falsely implicate the appellant. The appellant's version was rejected as false and fabricated. There were no material contradictions in the State's case, and the evidence supported the conviction. Regarding sentence, the court held that the seriousness of the crime and the absence of substantial and compelling circumstances justified t…

Source excerpt

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Single Witness Cautionary Rule
• Dna Evidence
• Appeal Against Conviction
• Appeal Against Sentence

Katlego v Minister of Police (313/2018)

Katlego v Minister of Police (313/2018) [2020] ZANWHC 88 (5 November 2020)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CA 06/2020

Judges

V.P. Noncembu, R.D. Hendricks

The court held that the Regional Magistrate did not err in finding that the appellant's personal circumstances did not constitute substantial and compelling circumstances justifying a lesser sentence than life imprisonment. The appellant's age, first offender status, family responsibilities, and old injury were considered but found insufficient to outweigh the objective gravity of the offence, the interests of the victim, and society. The court emphasized the seriousness of the rape of a child, particularly by a person in a position of authority, and the heightened vulnerability of the compla…

Source excerpt

• Rape Of A Child
• Minimum Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Sentencing Discretion
• Constitutional Rights Of Children