Rex v Mahametsa
| Jurisdiction | South Africa |
| Judge | De Wet CJ, Watermeyer JA, Tindall JA, Centlivres JA and Feetham JA |
| Judgment Date | 24 October 1940 |
| Citation | 1941 AD 83 |
| Court | Appellate Division |
Centlivres, J.A.:
In this case the accused was charged in the Orange Free State Provincial Division with culpable homicide in that on February 13th, 1940, he wrongfully and unlawfully killed Corrie Rossouw. He was tried before a Judge and two assessors, found guilty and sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour, and his licence was ordered to be suspended for five years; At the request of counsel for the accused the following, point of law was reserved: whether there was any legal evidence to support the finding of the Court that the accused was guilty.
It appears that the collision, which resulted in the death of the deceased, took place between 2 and 3 p.m. on the Bloemfontein-Shannon Main Road. That road, at the spot where the collision took place, was a straight, flat road, the tarred portion of which was 18 feet 6 inches wide. On each side of the tarred portion was a six feet width of gravel. The exact place of impact was not determined by the evidence, but after the collision the accused pointed out a spot somewhere near the middle of the tarred portion, but on the accused's correct side of the road. The deceased was aged 14 years, but was tall for his age. The accused was driving an eight cylinder La Salle. The accused in evidence stated that as soon as he left Bloemfontein he increased his speed to 40 miles an hour, he first saw the deceased riding a pedal bicycle in the
Centlivres, J.A.
same direction at, a point about 100 yards ahead; at about 60 yards from the deceased he sounded his hooter, as "the deceased was playing on the road and was swerving from left to right, he was zigzagging"; when he sounded his hooter he was driving at 45 miles an hour; the deceased looked back and then looked forward again, and as he did this his hat fell off: "I then slowed down. In fact I did not have my foot on the accelerator because I was afraid something might happen. At the time I had my foot on the brake"; at the time the car struck the deceased the accused was driving at about 35 miles an hour. There is no dispute as to these facts, although evidence was called in the trial Court to show that the accused was driving at a much greater speed than was stated by himself, but that Court was not satisfied that the Crown had established a speed in excess of that deposed to by the accused. There was, however, a dispute as to how the collision occurred. There were no eye-witnesses of the actual collision excepting the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rex v Linder and Others
...324 et seq.); Rex v Cilliers (supra, at 284 et seq.); Rex v Miller and Another (1939 AD 106, at 118). As to sentence, see Rex v Mahametsa (1941 AD 83, at 86); Rex v Sitomele and Others (1943, A.D., at As to the appeal by the Crown, it was competent for the Court to reserve the questions sou......
-
S v Motsoesoana
...to lay down a general rule as to the circumstances under which they should interfere (R v Sandig 1937 AD 296 at 303; R v Mahametsa 1941 AD 83 at 86; R v Sitomele and Others 1943 AD 448 at 455; R v Ramanka 1949 (1) SA 417 (A) at 419). In respect of extenuating circumstances in murder, the de......
-
Rex v Zulu and Others
...Court has declined to lay down a general rule as to the circumstances under which its discretion should be exercised. See Rex v Mahametsa, 1941 AD 83 at p. 86, and Rex v. G Sitomele and Others, 1943 AD 448 at p. 455. There are, no doubt, circumstances in some cases which justify this Court ......
-
Rex v De Kock
...a discretion to interfere, the limits of which it has not hitherto defined (Rex v Sandig (1937 AD 206 at pp. 302/3) and Rex v Mahametsa (1941 AD 83 at p. Where application is made for leave to appeal under the Court's extraordinary jurisdiction the applicant, in order to succeed must show t......
-
Rex v Linder and Others
...324 et seq.); Rex v Cilliers (supra, at 284 et seq.); Rex v Miller and Another (1939 AD 106, at 118). As to sentence, see Rex v Mahametsa (1941 AD 83, at 86); Rex v Sitomele and Others (1943, A.D., at As to the appeal by the Crown, it was competent for the Court to reserve the questions sou......
-
S v Motsoesoana
...to lay down a general rule as to the circumstances under which they should interfere (R v Sandig 1937 AD 296 at 303; R v Mahametsa 1941 AD 83 at 86; R v Sitomele and Others 1943 AD 448 at 455; R v Ramanka 1949 (1) SA 417 (A) at 419). In respect of extenuating circumstances in murder, the de......
-
Rex v Zulu and Others
...Court has declined to lay down a general rule as to the circumstances under which its discretion should be exercised. See Rex v Mahametsa, 1941 AD 83 at p. 86, and Rex v. G Sitomele and Others, 1943 AD 448 at p. 455. There are, no doubt, circumstances in some cases which justify this Court ......
-
Rex v De Kock
...a discretion to interfere, the limits of which it has not hitherto defined (Rex v Sandig (1937 AD 206 at pp. 302/3) and Rex v Mahametsa (1941 AD 83 at p. Where application is made for leave to appeal under the Court's extraordinary jurisdiction the applicant, in order to succeed must show t......
-
Rex v Linder and Others
...324 et seq.); Rex v Cilliers (supra, at 284 et seq.); Rex v Miller and Another (1939 AD 106, at 118). As to sentence, see Rex v Mahametsa (1941 AD 83, at 86); Rex v Sitomele and Others (1943, A.D., at As to the appeal by the Crown, it was competent for the Court to reserve the questions sou......
-
S v Motsoesoana
...to lay down a general rule as to the circumstances under which they should interfere (R v Sandig 1937 AD 296 at 303; R v Mahametsa 1941 AD 83 at 86; R v Sitomele and Others 1943 AD 448 at 455; R v Ramanka 1949 (1) SA 417 (A) at 419). In respect of extenuating circumstances in murder, the de......
-
Rex v Zulu and Others
...Court has declined to lay down a general rule as to the circumstances under which its discretion should be exercised. See Rex v Mahametsa, 1941 AD 83 at p. 86, and Rex v. G Sitomele and Others, 1943 AD 448 at p. 455. There are, no doubt, circumstances in some cases which justify this Court ......
-
Rex v De Kock
...a discretion to interfere, the limits of which it has not hitherto defined (Rex v Sandig (1937 AD 206 at pp. 302/3) and Rex v Mahametsa (1941 AD 83 at p. Where application is made for leave to appeal under the Court's extraordinary jurisdiction the applicant, in order to succeed must show t......