• Does your child have unlimited access to the Internet and apps on their phones? If you have not considered online dangers and health risks for your child, you have to read the article published in Servamus: June 2021.

  • Children as young as 12 years start to experiment with drugs. Make sure that you read the article published in Servamus: June 2021 to learn what parents can do if they expect that their child is using drugs.

  • During divorce battles one parent often alienates the other from having a relationship with their children. In Servamus: June 2021 we discuss this form of emotional abuse of parents and children.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
0
0
0
s2smodern
powered by social2s

- S v Klaas, Case No: CC51/2020, dated 30 November 2020, High Court Grahamstown (ECG)

Mr Wandile Klaas, hereinafter referred to as the accused, was convicted by the High Court in Grahamstown (nowadays called Makhanda) of count 1: housebreaking with intent to commit theft; count 2: rape; and count 3: theft.

The accused pleaded guilty to all three counts. As far as the rape count is concerned, the accused, once having broken into the complainant’s house, formulated an intention to rape her which he did twice - first with a condom and the second time without any protection. The accused ejaculated in both instances.

This initial case, namely S v Klaas, took place on 10 March 2013 in Sweetwaters near King William’s Town in the Eastern Cape. It seems, however, that the accused managed to escape detection until, fortuitously (Afrikaans: “toevallig”), during the investigation of another matter in respect of which the accused had been arrested. That was when it was noted that his DNA matched the DNA that was collected in respect of the present case namely, S v Klaas. At the time of this incident, the complainant was a 62-year-old woman.

At the time of this incident, the accused was 24 years old. At the time of the trial he was 32 years old - a difference of seven years (see para [9] of the High Court’s judgment).

During the trial the accused admitted five previous convictions - three of which related to housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.

In considering an appropriate sentence, the High Court remarked that the rape count had to be dealt with in terms of section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 (also referred to as the Minimum Sentences Act) (bearing in mind that the accused had raped the complainant more than once).

For as far as it is relevant to this present case namely S v Klaas, refer to section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 provides as follows:

“51. Discretionary minimum sentences for certain serious offences

(1) Notwithstanding any other law, but subject to subsections (3) and (6) [of this section 51]*, a regional court or a high court shall sentence a person it has convicted of an offence referred to in Part I of Schedule 2 [of this Minimum Sentences Act]* to imprisonment [incarceration] for life.

(2) to (8) …”

(Emphasis added and words in square brackets inserted by Pollex.)

***************************

[This is only an extract of this legal discussion published in Servamus: June 2021. If you are interested in finding out how you can read the rest of this discussion, send an email to: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..]

0
0
0
s2smodern
powered by social2s

Servamus - June 2021

Not a day goes by that we do not see or interact with a private security officer - either when we visit a shopping centre, have a security crisis at home or at the office or when a private security officer passes us while patrolling the neighbourhoods in their vehicles.
By Annalise Kempen
Family murder is a heartbreaking topic and one will never understand how parents can commit such acts involving their own children.
By Kotie Geldenhuys
“I am John. My ‘new’ father enjoyed a couple of drinks at night and then started swearing at my mother.
By Kotie Geldenhuys
When the eight-year-old victim of Nicolas Ninow (the so-called Dros rapist) was asked to testify in court, social media users were up in arms about the reason why this young victim had to testify.
By Kotie Geldenhuys

Pollex - June 2021

Read More - S v Klaas, Case No: CC51/2020, dated 30 November 2020, High Court Grahamstown (ECG)
Mr Wandile Klaas, hereinafter referred to as the accused, was convicted by the High Court in Grahamstown (nowadays called Makhanda) of count 1: housebreaking with intent to commit theft; count 2: rape; and count 3: theft.
A discussion entitled “Before the accused has pleaded to the charge” and/or, “Two men have been taken in for questioning by the police”, was published in Ask Pollex in Servamus: November 2020.
Read More - S v Thabani Luthuli Case no: AR 106/2020 High Court in Pietermaritzburg, KZN (KZP)
Introduction Mr Thabani Luthuli, the accused, was convicted before the regional court in Ixopo in KZN (“the trial court”) of count 1, housebreaking with the intent to rape, and, count 2, rape.

Letters - June 2021

Securing a conviction in a murder case is always a reason to celebrate that justice has been served.
June Magazine Cover

Servamus' Mission

Servamus is a community-based safety and security magazine for both members of the community as well as safety and security practitioners with the aim of increasing knowledge and sharing information, dedicated to improving their expertise, professionalism and service delivery standards. It promotes sound crime management practices, freedom of speech, education, training, information sharing and a networking platform.