S v N

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Labe J
• Judgment Date: 14 October 1999
• Citation: 2000 (1) SACR 209 (W)
• Hearing Date: 14 October 1999
• Counsel: S van Rensburg for the accused. C Fisher for the State.
• Court: Witwatersrand Local Division

Labe J:

A. The conviction

The accused in this matter, Mr Melusi Clayton Nkosi ('the accused'), was arraigned before this Court on three charges, namely:

Count 1: Murder, in that on or about 22 September 1998 and at Tulbagh Street, Culemborg Park in the district of Randfontein, he wrongfully and intentionally killed Ella Maria Dorothea Bekker. B

Count 2: Housebreaking with the intention to steal and theft, in thaton or about the same date and at the same place mentioned in count 1, the accused wrongfully and intentionally broke open a house and went inside it and there and then stole goods to the C value of approximately R22 000, the property or in the lawful possession of Izak Zirk Bekker and/or Allan Michael James Douth.

Count 3: Housebreaking with the intent to steal and attempted theft in that on or about the date and at the place referred to in count 1, the accused wrongfully and intentionally D broke open a garage and went inside it and there attempted to steal a BMW motorcar, the property of or in the lawful possession of the persons referred to in count 2. Originally the accused was charged with a co-accused, Mr Mandla Tshabalala ('Tshabalala'). However, the accused pleaded guilty to the charges whereas Tshabalala did not and there was a separation of trials.

E The accused made a statement in terms of s 112(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 ('the Act'). This is the statement which he made:

'1.

Ek, die ondergetekende, Melusi Clayton Nkosi, synde beskuldigde nr 1 in hierdie saak, verklaar hiermee soos volg:

1.1

Ek maak hierdie verklaring uit my eie vrye wil sonder enige dwang en/of onbehoorlike F benvloeding terwyl ek nugter en by my volle positiewe is.

1.2

Ek verstaan en begryp die aanklagte teen my soos in die akte van beskuldiging geformuleer en uiteengesit.

1.3

Ek bevestig dat die implikasies van hierdie verklaring deur my regsverteenwoordiger aan my verduidelik is.

2.

G Ad Aanklag 1 - Moord:

2.1

Ek erken dat ek op 22ste September 1998 saam met my medebeskuldigde in hierdie saak, Mandla Tshabalala, by Tulbachstraat 2, Culemborgpark, distrik Randfontein, binne die jurisdiksie gebied van die agbare hof, was.

2.2

Ek erken dat ek en my medebeskuldigde toe en daar die beweerde oorledene verskeie H kere met messe gesteek het.

2.3

Ek erken dat my handeling soos supra beskryf die direkte oorsaak was van die oorledene se dood en dat die oorledene op die toneel as gevolg van die veelvuldige penetrerende steekwonde gesterf het.

2.4

Ek erken dat die oorledene, synde 'n volwasse vrou, in lewe bekend gestaan het as Ella Maria Dorothea Bekker.

2.5

I Ek erken dat my optrede wederregtelik was en dat ek deur my optrede opsetlik die dood van die oorledene veroorsaak het.

2.6

Ek erken dat ek te alle tersaaklike tye geweet en besef het dat ek 'n strafbare misdaad pleeg.

Ad Aanklag 2 - Huisbraak met die opset om te steel en diefstal:

3.1

J Ek erken dat ek op 22 September 1998 saam met my gemelde medebeskuldigde by die plek genoem in para 2 supra was.

Labe J

3.2

Ek erken dat ons toe en daar 'n vensterruit van die woonhuis gebreek het en daardeur A toegang tot die woonhuis verkry het.

3.3

Ek erken dat tydens die gemelde oopbreek en binnegaan van die woonhuis dit my bedoeling was om goedere uit die woonhuis te steel.

3.4

Ek erken dat ons toe en daar die goedere vermeld in aanklag 2 van die akte van beskuldiging gesteel het deurdat ons die goedere van hulle oorspronklike posisies verwyder het en dit in tasse en 'n motorvoertuig gepak het. B

3.5

Ek erken dat die gemelde goedere die waarde van ongeveer R22 000 dra en dat dit die eiendom van en/of in die regmatige besit van Izak Zirk Bekker en/of Allan Michael James Douth is.

3.6

Ek erken dat my optrede wederregtelik was en dat ek opsetlik die handelinge soos supra beskryf verrig het. C

3.7

Ek erken dat ek te alle saaklike tye geweet en besef het dat ek 'n strafbare misdaad pleeg.

Ad Aanklag 3 - Huisbraak met die opset om te steel en poging tot diefstal:

4.1

Ek erken dat ek op 22ste September 1998 saam met my gemelde medebeskuldigde by die plek genoem in para 2 supra was.

4.2

Ek erken dat ons toe en daar die motorhuis oopgesluit het met 'n sleutel wat in die D woonhuis beskikbaar was en op di, wyse toegang tot die motorhuis verkry het.

4.3

Ek erken dat tydens die gemelde oopbreek en binnegaan van die motorhuis dit my bedoeling was om die motorvoertuig met registrasienommer KYJ628T te steel.

4.4

Ek erken dat ons toe en daar die gemelde voertuig probeer steel het deur dit aan die E gang te probeer kry om daarmee weg te ry.

4.5

Ek erken dat die gemelde voertuig die eiendom van Izak Zirk Bekker en/of Allan Michael James Douth is.

4.6

Ek erken dat my optrede wederregtelik was en dat ek opsetlik die handelinge soos supra beskryf verrig het.

4.7

Ek erken dat ek te alle saaklike tye geweet en besef het dat ek 'n strafbare misdaad F pleeg.

Ek bevestig dat ek die inhoud van hierdie verklaring begryp en verstaan.'

The accused signed the statement in the presence of his mother and father and his counsel, Mr Janse van Rensburg.

The accused was duly found guilty. The matter was then postponed for sentence. G

B. The murder

B1. Evidence

Prior to any evidence being led the State proved a further conviction of the accused H handed down on 23 June 1999 on which day the accused was sentenced to eight years' imprisonment for the offence of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft which was committed on 19 September 1998, some three days before the crimes committed with which we are concerned today.

It was common cause between the State and the accused that his date of birth was 12 I November 1981. He was thus almost 17 years old when he committed the crimes in this case.

Mr Janse van Rensburg, for the defence, called Mrs Raath, who is employed by the Department of Welfare and Social Development in Gauteng. She holds the degree of BA (Honours) in Social Work obtained J

Labe J

A from the University of Pretoria in 1986. Since 1987 she has been in the service of the Department as a social worker and probation officer. She had prepared a report after two interviews with the accused. Of course she was unable to confirm the truth of what the accused had said to her during the course of the interview. The report was handed in as exh G.

B The accused told Mrs Raath that he was influenced by Tshabalala to commit the crimes with which he was charged. She also assumed from the fact that Tshabalala was 21 years old and also had a previous conviction, that the accused was under his influence. The accused did not tell her that he also had a conviction in respect of housebreaking and that he had been sentenced to eight years' imprisonment in respect C thereof. Mrs Raath said that initially the accused placed all the blame on his co-accused but during the course of his second consultation he acknowledged that he had also taken part in the offence. That does not make sense. The accused said that he had put the blame on Tshabalala because he was afraid. That does not make sense. If he had been afraid he would have taken the blame for the offence on himself and not have blamed Tshabalala.

D The accused told Mrs Raath that he had used a vegetable pick in the murder. It subsequently transpired that the weapon was a small knife with a fixed blade. Mrs Raath said that she had obtained the information from the accused in regard to the crime in broad detail only. The accused told Mrs Raath that he heard the deceased coming E towards him and Tshabalala. In his evidence he said that he was in a bedroom when the deceased came into the house and he only went towards her when he was called by Tshabalala to do so. Tshabalala said that they had to get rid of her so that they could get away from the scene. The accused said that Tshabalala held the deceased from F behind and stabbed her in the front of her body. Thereafter the accused also began to stab the deceased. Mrs Raath asked the accused why they had not just tied her up. The accused says that it was because they did not have the time to do so. This was an obvious lie. He and Mr Tshabalala remained in the premises for some considerable time after the killing. The accused told Mrs Raath that the liquor which had been taken by him G made him feel dull to a degree. It also gave him the courage to go on with the murder. The accused told Mrs Raath that he did not go to Randfontein specifically to break into the house. The accused gave her the impression that Tshabalala had asked the accused to accompany him but did not tell the accused where he was going. Tshabalala told him that he had to 'finish doing something'.

H The accused, according to Mrs Raath, felt remorse over the killing. He thought however that God had already forgiven him for what he had done. The conclusions of Mrs Raath were contained in para 8 of her report which reads as follows:

'Vanuit die ondersoek was dit duidelik dat die beskuldigde se ouers gepoog het om aan hom 'n goeie opvoeding te bied en was daar in al sy basiese behoeftes voorsien. Die invloed van 'n negatiewe portuur groep het uiteindelik die beskuldigde se opvoeding oorskadu en hom tot kriminele betrokkenheid gelei. Weens die feit dat die beskuldigde 16 jaar oud was met die oortreding en sy medebeskuldigde reeds 21 jaar oud, en met 'n vorige oortreding van aanranding met die opset om te J beseer, word daar geglo dat die betrokke beskuldigde maklik beinvloed kon word deur sy medebeskuldigde. Laasgenoemde is ouer en wanneer

Labe J

sy eerste oortreding in aanmerking geneem word kan die afleiding gemaak word dat hy oor 'n A aggressie profiel beskik. Die beskuldigde het egter steeds die keuse gemaak om deel te neem aan die misdade en kan die gebruik van alkohol en dagga...