Cape Town – The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has amended the sentence of the “coffin case” duo who allegedly forced Victor Mlotshwa into a coffin and threatened him with death.
The incident was recorded and the video went viral in 2016.
Willem Oosthuizen and Theo Jackson were sentenced in October 2017 to 11 and 14 years in jail respectively, by the North Gauteng High Court.
On December 2 last year, after the two appealed their convictions and sentence, the SCA set aside their attempted murder and intimidation convictions, amending their sentences to six and seven years, respectively.
At the time, Judge Yvonne Mbata said: “Having considered and balanced the personal circumstances of the appellants, the nature and seriousness of the offences they committed and the interests of society, I am of the view that the following sentences are appropriate: in respect of the offence of kidnapping, a sentence of one year imprisonment; in respect of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm, a sentence of five years imprisonment; and in respect of defeating the ends of justice, one year imprisonment.
“I would order the shorter sentences to run concurrently with the five-year sentence. The result is that both appellants will be sentenced to an effective five years imprisonment.”
The court found that they should have been convicted of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm instead of attempted murder, given the lack of serious injury on Mlotshwa’s body. It was made clear that it did not make the conviction a lesser offence.
“This court finds that the most aggravating factor in this case was the failure by the appellants to acknowledge that what they did to Mlotshwa was very serious and humiliating.
"It is neither here nor there that Mlotshwa allegedly committed an offence, as no one is entitled to take the law into his own hands,” Judge Mbata said.
During their appeal, their sentences were backdated to August 25, 2017, which the SCA has since said was an error. In its amendment yesterday, the sentences were backdated to October27, 2017.
“On December 2, 2019, this court made an order in this appeal. This court upheld the appeal, set aside the order of the trial court and replaced it with an order imposing substituted convictions and sentences...
"In the result the error should be corrected to give effect to the true intention of this court,” the judge said.