M.J.M v S (A165/2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 952 (6 July 2018)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A165/2017
Judges
Mosopa, De Vos
High Court appeal in a rape conviction upheld the complainant’s competence, the use of an intermediary, and the sentence. The State’s sentence cross-appeal also failed.
Malambu v S (A526/16) [2018] ZAGPPHC 767 (5 February 2018)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A526/16
Judges
Hughes, Rangata
The High Court dismissed an appeal against convictions for kidnapping, assault and rape, holding that intermediary-related irregularities caused no prejudice.
Z.F v S (AR 764/2014) [2015] ZAKZPHC 49; [2016] 1 All SA 296 (KZP) (22 October 2015)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Case number
AR 764/2014
Judges
Gorven, Balton
The court found that the use of an intermediary for a witness over the age of 18 constituted an irregularity, but did not render the evidence inadmissible or result in a failure of justice, as the witness's answers were her own and there was no prejudice to the appellant. The admission of the J88 medical report without cross-examination of the doctor was a material irregularity, and the report was excluded from consideration. After evaluating the evidence, excluding the J88, the court held that the complainant's testimony was credible, corroborated, and sufficient to support the convictions o…
S v Dayimani (CA&R75/06 , 55/2006) [2006] ZAECHC 22; 2006 (2) SACR 594 (E) (15 May 2006)
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Case number
CA&R75/06
Judges
C. Plasket, D. Chetty
The trial was rendered unfair by three interrelated irregularities: (1) the complainant's evidence was given with the assistance of an intermediary without proper application or explanation to the unrepresented appellant, contrary to the requirements of s 170A of the Criminal Procedure Act; (2) the complainant was over 18 years old, making the use of an intermediary impermissible and her evidence inadmissible; (3) the magistrate failed to inform the appellant of the possibility of conviction on a competent verdict, further prejudicing his right to a fair trial. With the complainant's evidence…