Khoza v King (25 of 2004) [2004] SZSC 109 (18 November 2004)

Khoza v King (25 of 2004) [2004] SZSC 109 (18 November 2004)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF SWAZILAND


APPEAL CASE NO.25/2004


In the matter between:


MICHAEL KHOZA APPELLANT


AND


THE KING RESPONDENT


CORAM BROWDE JA


STEYN JA


TEBBUTT JA


JUDGMENT


Steyn JA


The appellant was convicted on lour counts of murder. He gave no evidence at his trial and has not challenged his conviction on these four charges.


He was sentenced to 1.8 years imprisonment on each count; the sentences to run concurrently. He has "implored" us to suspend half of


2


his 18 year sentence which we cannot do in terms of law. The grounds upon which he sought this relief read as follows:


  1. ". It was against my will to commit the four murders. I did not commit them intentionally. I was threatened and forced at gun point by my late co-accused named Bongani Vilakati to commit the murders. That is why I am extremely remorsed about the death of those innocent souls.

  2. I have three children who are provided for by myself. All these children are very young to provide for themselves. That is why I desperately need to come out and provide for them.

  3. Even before Bongani threatened and forced me to commit the murders along with him I was not a criminal but I was a hard worker and law-abiding immigrant.

  4. I have been in prison since 2000 for four offences. I strongly believe that I have fully reformed. The honourable court of appeal can rest assured that if I am released from prison I will not endanger society in any way. I will live in peace and harmony with all the members of society."


Even though the record is incomplete, it is clear that the offences proved to have been committed by the appellant, his co-accused and a person, now deceased, the Bongani Vilakati referred to in paragraph 1 cited above, were crimes of violence committed for gain. Such extenuating circumstances as were found to be present related to the fact that the said Vilakati was the ring leader and exercised some influence over the appellant. Despite the other factors cited above in the notice of appeal, a sentence of 18 years can in no sense be described as excessive. Indeed the appellant can count. himself fortunate that extenuating circumstances were found and that he escaped the death penalty.


3




The appeal is dismissed and the conviction and sentence are confirmed.


J.H. STEYN


Judge of Appeal


I agree J.BROWDE


Judge of Appeal


I agree P.H. TEBBUTT


Judge of Appeal


DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2004


4

▲ To the top