[6] In considering what an appropriate sentence for the accused should be, the Court considers the elements of retribution, prevention,
deterrence and reformation or rehabilitation and attempts to incorporate a combination thereof in the sentence to be imposed. Furthermore,
a balance of the circumstances relating to the accused, the crime and society, coupled with a blend of mercy is the aim that the
Court’s attempts to achieve when imposing an appropriate sentence. (S v Zinn 1969 (2) SA 537 (A) and S v Rabie 1975 (4) SA 855 (A)).
[7] I have considered the personal circumstances of the accused. They do not weigh up to the seriousness of the crime he committed.
His children have been cared for during the past 2½ years. A difficult burden is of course placed on his grandmother and the
other mothers and family. The accused should have thought of this before he committed the act. The fact that his children now suffers,
is a direct consequence of this deed. I cannot see how his health condition would have any affect on incarceration. The prison authorities
have provided him so far with medical treatment, although the accused have experienced problems with the regularity thereof. At least
such medication would cost him nothing, while he has to pay for it if he is not in prison.
[8] The offence that the accused has committed cannot be otherwise described, namely as brutal and heinous. I also believe that the
accused planned to kill the deceased and that is the reason why he took his panga to a wake. I do believe that there was some provocation,
because the deceased quarrelled with him before she left, 2 days prior to the incident and again when he walked with her and told
him she may not return to him. However, such provocation can never justify any retaliation of using a weapon to assault her. The
accused in reality chopped her to death. He inflicted 12 wounds on her, although most then on her bare hands when she attempted to
defend herself with her bare hands. I reject his version of the accidental killing and the manner in which he described it. The several
wounds the doctor found on her hands indicate several cuts. Apart from this he used the panga to chop at her at least 3 times. She
had chop wounds on her left hand, against her head and her throat was cut from ear to ear severing all the main arteries, so causing
her death. This indicates at least 3 different chopping wounds delivered to a defenceless woman with a baby with her. This action
was in my opinion inhuman and cannot be tolerated in any civilised society.
[9] This brings me to the interest of the society. It has frequently been said by our Courts that offences where men resort to dangerous
weapons to dissolve household disputes are not to be tolerated by society and that society demands that such offenders be severely
punished by the Courts. In the cases referred to by both counsel, husbands or boyfriends stabbed or cut their partners by using knives
or pangas. Despite sentences of long term imprisonment, these type of offences still continue. The Court, as an instrument of society,
has the responsibility to impose a visible and balanced punishment, and for this accused it will be a long term of imprisonment for
this type of crime.
[15] The elements of punishment have been referred to above. The aspect of retribution should not be over-emphasised, but the offender
should experience by the sentence imposed that he is punished. It has been said that from the side of the offender retribution amounts
to the atonement for his crime through the punishment which he receives. From the side of the community it amounts to an “emphatic
denunciation” of the offender and his crime and the infliction of pain to the degree he deserves. By serving his sentence it
is regarded that his debt to society has been paid. (Du Toit - Straf in Suid Afrika, 1st edition, page 103). If the punishment is too lenient, he is not “hurt” as this element of retribution has been described.
In S v Ndlovu 1969 (2) SA 230 (R), Young, J said:
“The object of punishment is to hurt the offender and to hurt him sufficiently to prevent him from committing a similar offence.”
The elements of prevention of deterrence hits on both the convicted accused and society. The accused has to be deterred not to commit
such an offence again and others should take heed of the sentence imposed on this accused for his offence, not to commit a similar
offence. In the same vein, both the accused has to be prevented to commit such an offence again and the sentence should prevent other
members of the community from committing such an offence. Finally, rehabilitation should also form part of the purpose of sentencing
an accused.
[11] I have already indicated that the accused has to be sentenced to a long period of imprisonment. Both the nature of the offence
and society demands it. The prevalence of these type of offences are there for anymore to read in the newspapers or hear over radio
broadcasts or even to be seen on television. The courts are confronted with all these incidents and severe sentences have been imposed.
The question is whether that helped to prevent these type of offences to be committed. I believe society that looks up to the courts
to impose suitable sentences also has a role to play. The sentences imposed by the courts will not stop this steam-rolling effect
of such offences if the community does not educate its members and bring the consequences of committing such deeds to everyone’s
attention. The Courts will discharge its responsibilities and in this particular case this Court again says such conduct will not
be tolerated and I shall neglect my duty if I do not impose a severe sentence on this accused.
[12] Taking all the relevant elements and interests into consideration the accused is sentence as follows:
“30 years imprisonment.”
____________
MULLER, J
ON BEHALF OF THE STATE:
MS H. JACOBS
INSTRUCTED BY:
OFFICE
OF THE PROSECUTOR-GENERAL
ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE:
MS F. KISHI
INSTRUCTED BY:
DIRECTORATE OF LEGAL AID
SAFLII:
|
Terms of Use
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/na/cases/NAHC/2007/37.html
.RTF of original document