Recent Case: General principles of criminal law

• Author: Hoctor, S.
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v35/i2a5
• Published date: 03 October 2022
• Date: 03 October 2022
• Citation: (2022) 35 SACJ 222
• Pages: 222-233

General principles of criminal law

SHANNON HOCTOR

Stellenbosch University

1 Common purpose, compulsion (necessity) and ‘planned

or premeditated’ murder – S v Ntshaba 2022 JDR 0279

(ECG)

1.1 Facts and judgment

The case of S v Ntshaba2022 JDR 0279 (ECG) concerned the killing

of the deceased, following a drinking spree of the workers on the

farm of one Bezuidenhout. Being a teetotaller, the deceased had not

partaken of any alcohol himself, but all three accused had done so.

The apparent motive for killing the deceased was that the accused

were concerned that the deceased would report their imbibing to

their employer Bezuidenhout, who abhorred alcohol (at para [1]).

Theaccused therefore proceeded to the deceased’s home after he had

left the gathering, and attacked him, pinning him to the ground and

slitting his throat. Their intoxication was not of such a nature as to

negate their capacity or intention (at para [14] in respect of accused

Ntshaba and Kwakwa; it does not appear that any intoxication-related

defence was raised in respect of accused Faniso), although the court

held that the intoxication did give rise to ‘an alcohol-inspired irrational

attempt to avoid workplace strife by killing the deceased’ (at para [25]),

which militated against nding that the murder was ‘planned or

premeditated’.

The accused were charged with planned and/or premeditated

murder, on the basis of acting with a common purpose to unlawfully

and intentionally kill the deceased (at para [2]). As far as the respective

roles of the accused were concerned in this grim scenario, accused

Ntshaba slit the deceased’s throat while accused Kwakwa assisted in

tripping the deceased and holding his lower body on the ground (at

para [2]). Both these accused readily admitted t heir liability (at para [14]).

The third accused, Faniso, was identied by the other accused as

having associated herself with the plan as soon as it was hatched, and

having participated by holding a pair of shorts over the deceased’s

RECENT CASES

https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v35/i2a5

222

(2022) 35 SACJ 222

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd