Servamus interviewed a few former police members to find out about their “lives after the police” and a community member who joins the fight against crime – especially environmental crime. Read their stories from pp 20-26 in Servamus: November 2017.
With the latest crime statistics being released at the end of October, it sketches a less positive picture. We look at alternative ways in which citizens choose to protect themselves. Read the article from pp 14-19 in Servamus: November 2017.
It is always a privilege to participate in awards ceremonies where excellent police work is recognised. Thanks to Trackers individual police members and units have been awarded for their fight against vehicle crime for the 18th time! Read the article from pp 46-49 in Servamus: November 2017.
There are two recent reported cases regarding all the dos and the don'ts regarding extradition (Afrikaans: "uitlewering"). They are S v Patel 2016 (2) SACR 141 (GJ) and Carolissen v Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP] 2016 (2) SACR 171 (WCC).
It is suggested that all crime investigators take note and store this information somewhere in case they are tasked with extradition proceedings.
Extradition must NOT be confused with deportation.
- S V Sebofi 2015 (2) SACR 179 (GJ)
Mr Sebofi (the accused) was convicted on two counts of rape by the regional court in Roodepoort (the trial court), and sentenced to life incarceration.
On appeal by the accused against his convictions and sentence before the High Court in Johannesburg (the court of appeal), the court criticised the calibre of the presentation of this case before the trial court.
- Chala and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), KwaZulu-Natal and Another 2015 (2) SACR 283 (KZP)
The proviso (Afrikaans: “voorbehoud”) to section 93ter(1) of the Magistrates’ Court Act 32 of 1944 provides as follows:
“Provided that if an accused is standing trial in the court of a regional division on a charge of murder, whether together with other charges or accused or not, the judicial officer shall at that trial be assisted by two assessors unless such an accused requests that the trial be proceeded with without assessors, whereupon the judicial officer may in his discretion summon one or two assessors to assist him.”
(Emphasis added by Pollex.)
- S V Tladi and Others 2016 (1) SACR 424 (GP)
The three accused persons in this case were each convicted in the regional court (“the trial court”) on one count of kidnapping and one count of rape. They were sentenced as follows:
ACCUSED 1 (28 years old at the time of committing the offences supra):
Count 1 (kidnapping): Four years’ incarceration; and
- S V Masoka and Another 2015 (2) SACR 268 (ECP)
Two accused persons were standing trial before the magistrates’ court in Humansdorp in the Eastern Cape on a charge of robbery.
During cross-examination of accused 2 by the public prosecutor, it was put to accused 2 that the State/prosecution had obtained a witness statement from Mr Thanduxolo. Before the content of such statement was put to accused 2, Mr Van Wyk, who appeared on behalf of accused 2, objected thereto. After discussions with both the prosecutor and Mr Van Wyk, the trial magistrate put the following information on record:
“1. The plea explanation disclosing the name and address of the alibi witness occurred on 3 February 2014;
2. the defence attorney, Mr Van Wyk, had consulted with the alibi witness Thanduxolo on 4 February 2014;
3. after the aforesaid events the prosecutor requested the investigating officer to trace the witness and obtain a witness statement from him, which the investigating officer did, and he furnished the prosecutor with such statement on 11 February 2014;