S v Haasbroek; S v November

JurisdictionSouth Africa
CourtEastern Cape Division
JudgeKotzé R, Eksteen R en Addleson R
Judgment Date05 December 1968
Citation1969 (1) SA 356 (E)
Hearing Date05 December 1968

Kotzé, J.:

I have read the judgments prepared by EKSTEEN, J., and ADDLESON, J., and am in agreement with the orders indicated in the E ultimate paragraph of the former judgment. The normal phraseology used in confirming proceedings in terms of sec. 98 of Act 32 of 1942 appear to me to be inappropriate in the case of S v Haasbroek having regard F to the exceedingly light sentence imposed on a man who committed a brutal and sadistic assault. In confirming the conviction and sentence I wish to state that I expressly refrain from employing the customary phraseology that 'the proceedings . . . appear to be in accordance with justice'.

I find myself unable to agree with the suggestion of my Brother ADDLESON G that amending legislation may be desirable. It seems to me that there may be weighty reasons of public policy and justice which require that a person once sentenced should not be in peril of sustaining an increased sentence in or as the result of automatic review proceedings.

Eksteen R

The Registrar is requested to forward a copy of the record in these proceedings to the Minister of Police.

Judgment

Eksteen, R.:

A Die beskuldigde in die eerste saak is voor die landdros van Hankey aangekla weens aanranding deurdat hy op 23 Februarie 1968 vir Charles November aangerand het deur hom met die plathand in sy gesig te klap; en tweedens van aanranding met die doel om ernstige liggaamlike leed te berokken deurdat hy op dieselfde datum vir Charles November aangerand het 'deur hom met 'n kierie, knuppel en sambok op sy liggaam B te slaan, sy hande met handboeie vas te boei, en hom met 'n tou wat aan die handboeie vasgemaak is teen 'n deur op te trek, en hom toe en daar en daardeur allerhande wonde, kneusings, letsels en seerplekke toegedien het met die doel om genoemde Charles November ernstige liggaamlike leed aan te doen'. Aanvanklik het die beskuldigde onskuldig C gepleit, maar tydens die verhoor van die saak het hy sy pleit na een van skuldig op albei klagtes verander. Die landdros het hom dan ook skuldig bevind; die klagtes as een beskou vir doeleindes van vonnis; en hom gevonnis tot 'n boete van R40 of 40 dae gevangenisstraf, en 'n verdere 80 dae gevangenisstraf wat opgeskort is vir drie jaar op voorwaarde dat die beskuldigde nie gedurende daardie tydperk weer D skuldig bevind word aan aanranding met die doel om ernstige liggaamlike leed te berokken nie.

Die omstandighede van hierdie aanrandings, en die straf wat die beskuldigde hom daardeur op die hals gehaal het, is van so 'n onrusbarende aard, dat ek genoodsaak voel om die feite van die saak breedvoerig uiteen te sit.

E [Die Edelagbare Regter het die getuienis ontleed en soos volg voortgegaan.]

Dat die beskuldigde skuldig is aan 'n flagrante en brutale aanranding op 'n weerlose seun wat sy gevangene was, ly geen twyfel nie. Die feit dat F die beweerde oortreding wat die klaer sou gepleeg het, 'n uiters geringe een was, nl. die diefstal van twee botteltjies koeldrank ter waarde van 10 sent, maak hierdie onwettige en ongedissiplineerde optrede van hom des te meer laakbaar. In die lig hiervan was dit vir my skokkend om te gewaar dat die landdros hom slegs 'n boete van R40 of 40 dae gevangenisstraf opgelê het, benewens 'n verdere 80 dae gevangenisstraf wat opgeskort was.

G Op dieselfde dag as wat hierdie saak op hersiening voor my gedien het, het daar ook 'n ander saak, nl. die van S v Refery Alla, wat voor dieselfde landdros gedien het, ook op hersiening gekom. In daardie saak H is 'n Bantoeman van 23 jaar van aanranding met die doel om ernstige liggaamlike leed te berokken aangekla deurdat hy die klaagster met 'n mes op haar voorhoof gesteek het. Die landdros het bevind dat die beskuldigde die klaagster wel met 'n mes aangerand het, en 'n snywond op haar gesig, ongeveer 6 duim lank, veroorsaak het. Die landdros het verder bevind dat die beskuldigde kwaad was as gevolg van 'n rusie tussen hom en die seun en dogter van die klaagster. Die beskuldigde het na die huis van die klaagster gegaan met 'n mes en 'n stok in sy hand, en probeer om...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
21 practice notes
  • Attorney-General, Venda v Maraga
    • South Africa
    • 6 October 1992
    ...the Supreme Court would, at first blush, include the increase of sentence where justice demands it, but in S v Haasbroek; S v November 1969 (1) SA 356 (E) at 359D-E it was correctly decided that the increase of sentence is not included in such powers. F It is clear that s 304 does not entit......
  • S v Kgafela
    • South Africa
    • 6 June 2001
    ...crime, and is a necessary concomitant of punishment. See Du Toit Straf in Suid Afrika at 89 - 91; S v Zinn (supra); S v Haasbroek E 1969 (1) SA 356 (E). The interests of the community. The Court fulfils an important function in applying the law in the community. It has a duty to maintain la......
  • Attorney-General, Venda v Maraga
    • South Africa
    • Venda Supreme Court
    • 6 October 1992
    ...the Supreme Court would, at first blush, include the increase of sentence where justice demands it, but in S v Haasbroek; S v November 1969 (1) SA 356 (E) at 359D-E it was correctly decided that the increase of sentence is not included in such powers. F It is clear that s 304 does not entit......
  • S v Kgafela
    • South Africa
    • Bophuthatswana High Court
    • 6 June 2001
    ...crime, and is a necessary concomitant of punishment. See Du Toit Straf in Suid Afrika at 89 - 91; S v Zinn (supra); S v Haasbroek E 1969 (1) SA 356 (E). The interests of the community. The Court fulfils an important function in applying the law in the community. It has a duty to maintain la......
  • Get Started for Free
21 cases
  • Attorney-General, Venda v Maraga
    • South Africa
    • 6 October 1992
    ...the Supreme Court would, at first blush, include the increase of sentence where justice demands it, but in S v Haasbroek; S v November 1969 (1) SA 356 (E) at 359D-E it was correctly decided that the increase of sentence is not included in such powers. F It is clear that s 304 does not entit......
  • S v Kgafela
    • South Africa
    • 6 June 2001
    ...crime, and is a necessary concomitant of punishment. See Du Toit Straf in Suid Afrika at 89 - 91; S v Zinn (supra); S v Haasbroek E 1969 (1) SA 356 (E). The interests of the community. The Court fulfils an important function in applying the law in the community. It has a duty to maintain la......
  • Attorney-General, Venda v Maraga
    • South Africa
    • Venda Supreme Court
    • 6 October 1992
    ...the Supreme Court would, at first blush, include the increase of sentence where justice demands it, but in S v Haasbroek; S v November 1969 (1) SA 356 (E) at 359D-E it was correctly decided that the increase of sentence is not included in such powers. F It is clear that s 304 does not entit......
  • S v Kgafela
    • South Africa
    • Bophuthatswana High Court
    • 6 June 2001
    ...crime, and is a necessary concomitant of punishment. See Du Toit Straf in Suid Afrika at 89 - 91; S v Zinn (supra); S v Haasbroek E 1969 (1) SA 356 (E). The interests of the community. The Court fulfils an important function in applying the law in the community. It has a duty to maintain la......
  • Get Started for Free