South Africa: High Courts - Eastern Cape

You are here:
SAFLII >>
Databases >>
South Africa: High Courts - Eastern Cape >>
2006 >>
[2006] ZAECHC 132
| Noteup
| LawCite
S v Dlenge (CC30/2006) [2006] ZAECHC 132 (25 April 2006)
Download original files |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
BISHO
CASE NO. CC30/2006
In the matter between:
THE
STATE
and
VUYANI DLENGE
ACCUSED
JUDGMENT
DHLODHLO ADJP:
1. The accused, a 47 – year – old male person is charged with one count of rape.
2. It is alleged that on or about the 31st day of May 2000 at Tshoxa village in the district of Keiskammahoek he unlawfully and intentionally had sexual intercourse with Z W, a 10 – year – old female person without her consent.
3. The charge is accompanied by a warning in terms of the provisions of section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997, relating to minimum sentences, to the effect that the provisions shall apply if he is convicted, as the victim is a girl under the age of 16 years.
4. The accused pleaded not guilty and raised the defence of
alibi.
5. According to Dr Lacey who examined the complainant on 08 June
2000 the complainant’s hymen was perforated. Dr Lacey states
that as the
alleged sexual assault had taken place a week before the date of examination, no
traces could be found.
6.1 The complainant who is now 15 years old, testified in an open court. Her evidence may be summed up as follows:
6.2 She said that on 31 May 2000 at about 14h00 she was at a
Mfaca homestead playing with her friends, some of whom were Nohalala
and
Nonki.
6.3 She said that at some stage her friends went to a shop to buy
dolls and she remained alone in the house in which they were playing.
6.4 While she was alone in the house the accused entered. He undressed her of her panty and inserted his penis into her vagina. She felt pain in her vagina. The accused closed her mouth with a handkerchief.
6.5 The accused warned her that if she reported the incident to
any person he would kill her.
6.6 In her evidence – in –
chief she said that she reported the incident to Wele and Fundiswa on the same
evening and
that she was taken to a doctor on the following day. She said that
she told the doctor that she had been raped on the previous
day.
6.7 Under cross – examination, the complainant said that she
was raped on 22 May 2000.
7.1 Fundiswa Webhu is sister to the
complainant’s mother.
7.2 When she noticed that the complainant
could not sit properly, she and Zoliswa asked her what had happened to her but
she refused
to talk.
7.3 On the second day Wele arrived. Ms Webhu and Zoliswa asked Wele to question the complainant about what had happened to her, as she would not tell them.
7.4 Wele questioned the complainant. The complainant said that
she had slept with the accused.
7.5 The complainant said that the accused
had inserted his penis into her mouth.
7.6 She told them that the accused
had attempted to “do it underneath”.
7.7 When they examined
her they saw bruises on the inside of her thighs and on the side of the vagina
where there was a swelling.
7.8 Four days after the report Ms Webhu
reported the incident to the police. On that very day the complainant was taken
to a doctor.
7.9 Ms Webhu said that she did not remember dates of the alleged sexual assault, of the questioning, of the report and when a report was made to the police.
7.10 The complainant told Webhu that the accused had said that
he would kill her if she reported the incident to anyone.
7.11 She said
that Zoliswa arrived when Wele was about to hit the complainant so that she
could tell the truth. By then she had not
yet mentioned the name of the person
who had done it to her.
7.12 The complainant mentioned the alleged
perpetrator’s name when Wele was threatening that she would take her to
the police
who would beat her up.
8.1 Anathi Nohalala Koti is 15 years
old. She is the complainant’s friend.
8.2 On a certain day which
she does not remember she was playing with the complainant on the premises of
Mfaca family.
8.3 She said that the accused walked past them but later
returned and stood in the doorway after which he closed the door.
8.4 She
said that when the accused was about to close the door she and another girl by
the name of Phelokazi ran out of the house,
leaving the complainant
inside.
8.5 She said that Nonki had gone to the shop when the accused
came.
8.6 She further said that this incident occurred at about between 12h00 and 12h30.
8.7 She said that after the accused entered the house in which
they were playing, she and Phelokazi ran to their homes. She did not
report to
any person and did not discuss the incident with the complainant later because
she was “scared”.
9.1 The accused denied the allegation. He
said that from about two weeks before 31 May 2000 he was preparing for a
traditional ceremony
at his home and that at no stage during this period did he
go to Mfaca family.
9.2 He said that the house in which he is alleged to
have sexually assaulted the complainant is on the same premises as the
shop.
9.3 He said that at the shop there are many people who sit outside
the shop to enjoy liquor they buy from the shop.
9.4` He said that
customers would have heard screams had the complainant screamed.
10. Mr
Kristafor for the State submitted that he would not support the conviction
because of serious contradictions in the State’s
case.
11. The Court shares this view. The complainant did not tell the Court that the accused performed oral sexual intercourse and that Nohalala and Phelokazi were inside the house when the accused entered it.
12. The Complainant said that she reported the incident on the same day. This is contrary to what her aunt Fundiswa Webhu told the Court.
13. Wele had to threaten her for her to mention the name of the
accused.
14. The accused gave evidence in a straight forward manner.
There is no indication that he was not telling the truth.
15. Both the complainant and Nohalala were ten and eight years old, respectively, at the time of the alleged incident. The cautionary rule which applies to children should apply to them as well.
16. In the Court’s view reliance may not be placed on
their evidence.
17. It cannot be said that the State has proved the guilt
of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
18. The accused is accordingly
found not guilty of rape or of a lesser
offence.
_____________________________
A E B
DHLODHLO
ACTING DEPUTY JUDGE PRESIDENT
25TH APRIL
2006
HEARD ON: 24 APRIL 2006
FOR THE STATE: MR J
KRISTAFOR
FOR THE DEFENCE: Ms N MTINI