About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2021
>>
[2021] ZAGPPHC 155
|
|
S v Maduane (CC82/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 155 (3 March 2021)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION
PRETORIA
CASE
NO: CC82/2019
In
the matter between:
THE
STATE
vs
COLLINS
LUCKY
MADUANE
Accused
JUDGMENT:
SENTENCE
Bam
J:
1.
To impose the most appropriate sentence is
a difficult task
.
2.
The
accused
was convicted
of
the
murder
of
Florah
Maubane, comm
i
tted
on
3
March 1999.
I
t
seems
that
the
accused,
although apparently arrested
at
some time after the
murder,
the case against him was
subsequently
withdrawn.
I
t follows
that,
after
19 year
s
,
the
l
ong
arm
of
the
law got
hold
of
him, and justice
i
s
seen to
be done.
3.
The purposes of
sentence
are retribution (that is the punishment itself),
deterrenc
e
,
rehabilitatio
n
,
and
prevention.
4.
The
State,
represented
by Adv
Ngobeni,
contended
that
Section
51(1)
of
The
Minimum
Sentences
Act
108 of
1997, providing for
a
minimum
sentence
of
l
i
fe
imprisonment,
is
applicable in
that
the murder
was premeditated.
(The indictment
was amended
accordingly.) Adv Fisher-Klein submitted that the murder was not
pre-meditated, and
that
the minimum
sentence of life
i
mprisonment is not
appl
i
cable.
5.
When
i
t
is taken
into
account
that
the deceased
cried
out, two
or three
times
that
night,
probably
in order
to
call for
help,
that
she
probably
resisted
the
accuse
d
's
evil
intentions,
and
that
the
accused
proceeded
nevertheless
to
kill
her
by
strangling her, justiy
the
inference
that
the
murder
was
indeed
premeditated
as
contended
by Adv
Ngobeni.
6.
I
t follows tha
t
,
in accordance with the provisions of Sec 51(1) of
the said Ac
t
,
the
Court shall impose life
imprisonment, unless the court finds that substantial and
compelling
circumstances
exist
justifying
a
lesser
sentenc
e
,
the
Court
shall
i
mpose
a
l
esser
sentenc
e
.
I
n any
event, this
court
has
inherent
jurisdiction to
i
mpose l
i
fe
imprisonment in
appropriate
circumstances.
7.
I
n
order
to decide what the most appropriate sentence would be,
the court has to
take
into consideration
the
nature
and
extent of the
crime,
the
personal
circumstances of the accused, and the interests of the
community
.
The interests
of
the
community
includes
a
victim
impact
consideratio
n
;
in
cases
of
violent
crimes,
like
murder,
it means the court must take
into
account
what
impact the
crime
had on the family
of the
victim. In matters of a very
serious
nature, it is of
i
mportance
to take into account that the personal circumstances
of the accused
necessari
l
y
recede
i
nto
the backgroun
d
.
8.
Murder
of
women
in our
society
is
rife.
Despite
severe
sentences
i
mposed
by our courts,
murder
of
women
i
s rapidly on the
increase. This
increase was
even noticeable
long
before
1999.
Campa
i
gns
against
violence
against women
are
the order
of
the
day.
There is
a
public
outcry
and
the
issue
is
apparently
debated
even
in
parliament.
The
authorities
are
at
loss
how
and
in
what way this evil
should
be
contained.
I
t
does
not seem
that
any
effort
by interested
instances
and
organisations
have any effect
at all. The
community
keeps
on
sufferin
g
.
9.
The
accused
was
not
prepared to
admit
in court to what
he
did
to
Florah
and
why
he
killed
her.
At
all
relevant times
the
accused
endeavoured
to
get
away
with
murder. He succeeded
for
about
19
years.
I
t
seems that the accused was
driven by some or
other supernatural experience, (he said to the witnesses that
he was
haunted
by
Florah's
spirit), to confess
. But,
even then, he took
steps
to
avoid the
police
i
nterfering.
I
t
i
s
not clear what the accused wanted
to
achieve
when he
made
the
confessio
n
,
and
even
pointed
out
the places
where
he
disposed of Florah's body parts.
On
the
probabil
i
ties
i
t
was an attempt to absolve
himself
or
clear
his
conscience. This
conduct
of the accuse
d
,
however, has no
mitigating effect at all in that the accused
showed no remorse, and that he, even after conviction, testified that
he was falsely
implicated by his sister, Cynthia.
10.
The accused's personal circumstances are as
follows
: He has several
relevant
previous
conviction
s
. He, amongst
others, admitted to three attempted murder
convictions
after
the killing of Florah.
At the
time of his arrest he was gainfully
employed
and lived w
i
th his mother. He
is not married.
He has three
Technicon qual
i
fications
. He has health conditions
in
that his gall bladder and one kidney had
been
remove
d
.
11.
The
aggravating
circumstances are
overwhelming.
For
about
19
years
the
family
of Florah did not
know
what exactly happened to her,
although the accused was suspected
to
have
killed
her. Even
at
present
the family cannot
pay
the
last
respects to Florah as her body has never been
found.
The
continuous suffering
of
the
family
must
be
devastating
.
12.
Florah was a young student,
with full life expectation
s
.
She
was
surely
defenceless when
she was killed. The accused showed no respect to
her
when
he attacked and strangled her, and even after
having kept Florah's corpse in
his
room for three days so that it started
decomposing
, he also
mutilated, burned
and
buried
her
remains.
The
accused's
conduct
was
absolute
l
y
gruesom
e
.
13.
There
are
no
substantial
and
compell
i
ng
circumstances
justifying
a
lesser sentence
than
the
prescribed minimum
of
life
i
mprisonment.
14.
Even if
this
court were to be
wrong in
finding
that
the murder was pre-meditated,
the
court
woul
d
,
in
any
event,
have
i
mposed
life
i
mprisonment
as
the
most appropriate sentence in the circumstances
.
The
accused
is
sentenced
to
life
i
mprisonment.
AJ
BAM
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
DATE
OF HEARING 22
FEBRUARY TO 03 MARCH 2021
DATE
OF SENTENCE 03
MARCH
DATE
OF WRITTEN REASONS FOR
SENTENCE
15 MARCH 2021
APPEARANCES:
For
The State Advocate
SD Ngobeni
For
the Accused
Advocate SF Fisher-Klein