A convict handed a 10-year sentence for assault wants the court to reduce his jail-time because he had given the family of his victim two goats as compensation for cleansing.However, the high court in Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, rejected Philani Zondi’s plea arguing that his sentence was appropriate with the assault he unleashed on his then fiancé and her former lover two years ago. Zondi was sentenced by the Camperdown regional court to 10 years for assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm, two years for malicious damage to property, and another three years for violating the protection order his fiancé had obtained against him before the incident. The sentences are to be served concurrently. However, Zondi claimed at the high courts that the sentence is too harsh, despite it being a legal minimum for assault. “The argument raised in the appeal [was] that there were substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from the prescribed minimum sentence is primarily based on the so-called compensation and payment of the two goats for the purposes of the cleansing ceremony,” Read part of the judgement. However, the high court found his reasoning to have been distorted. Zondi, who had drunk with the victim, decided to take a drive. He parked the car at Mazithanqaze, slept in it, and went out. When he woke up moments later, he realised that his fiancé was not in the car, and decided to drive to her house. He saw her getting out of the Toyota Quantum taxi that was being driven by his former partner when he got there. According to court documents, Zondi got off his car and grabbed an awl spanner. He then assaulted the man who ran away, leaving his vehicle. Zondi drove a taxi into bushes, got out and then assaulted his lover with a wheel spanner. The woman had been granted protection from Zondo, but he violated it the next day by slapping her in a tavern. Michael Harrison of the High Court said that Zondo’s crimes were so serious, the regional court knew it. “SA is under attack with acts of abuse against our women and children, almost on a daily basis. “The very conduct of the appellant in attacking both complainants with a wheel spanner, clearly highlights why the court a quo found him to be a person from which society requires protection. And, given the circumstances of this case, it is, indeed, fortunate that no deaths emanated from the appellant’s conduct.” Harrison stated that given this unique and unusual case, one could argue that it was the victim’s decision to not bring a criminal charge against the perpetrator. She also decided to forgive and returned to the relationship. This conduct could be considered as a mitigating or compelling factor to determine if there are substantial and compelling reasons to depart from the sentence. “Would it be in the interests of justice for a court do so, where the victim acted in such a manner due to the abuse that she had been subjected to? In my view, I do not think it can be regarded as a mitigating factor or as a consideration to conclude whether there are substantive and compelling circumstances to deviate from the prescribed sentence,” said Harrison.Would it be in the interests of justice for a court do so, where the victim acted in such a manner due to the abuse that she had been subjected to?— Michael Harrison, High court judgeThe judge said such will send a wrong message to society, and will undermine the dignity and humanity of abused women in SA.He found that there were no substantial and compelling reasons to deviate from the imposed minimum sentence, nor was there any misdirection by the magistrate.Sowetan
2025-10-28 11:28:36
Man fails to have sentence for assault cut
