A convicted rapist, sentenced to life for raping a woman three times, has failed in his efforts to have his jail time reduced as the Mahikeng high court in the North West disagreed with his claims that his youthfulness had not been taken into account, that he had not injured the victim, and that he should be set free after following a rehabilitation programme.
Judge Andrew Reddy agreed that the regional magistrate — who he does not identify — was correct in finding no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from the mandatory life sentence, but was scathing about the manner in which the case was handled.
John Thijane Griqua was jailed for life in December 2022 for raping a woman identified only as MPR in a trial which Reddy found to have consistently used diction that “taints the decorum of the proceedings”.
“Notably, is the use of the word 'rounds' to denote the number of times that the appellant raped MPR during the subsistence of the proceedings,” he said, describing it as a dangerous mischaracterisation of rape.
“Words matter. Words give a construction of a certain viewpoint of the world, and this viewpoint tends to be gendered. Though rape is defined as an unlawful and intentional act of sexual penetration of one person by another, without consent, it must be buttressed that the victim does not experience rape as being sexual at all.”
Reddy held that the decorum of court proceedings and the language employed by officers of the court was important.
“The regional magistrate, relevant to this matter, was not simply an umpire in the proceedings. It was incumbent on him to ensure that the tenets of justice were served by inter alia being a conduit for the introduction of admissible and relevant evidence but also actively filtering questions that were posed to the victim of sexual violation.
“It is regrettable that he did not address this loosely used colloquial term of ‘rounds’ when it was first uttered in open court and even more regrettably perpetuated its use in his judgment.”
During the trial, it emerged that MPR had gone out with friends on November 6 to SS Butchery. She had a few drinks and sometime after 10pm her boyfriend, LC, arrived and her friends left.
In the early hours of the morning MPR and LC lost track of each other, and LC left the venue with MPR’s cellphone, meaning she had no way to call him or anyone else.
While trying to find her boyfriend, MPR encountered Griqua, who told her he had seen LC leave in the company of another woman and that he knew where they were.
The work of a court and of all who appear before it is a serious business. The words spoken, written and made decisions have far-reaching consequences on all intimately involved
— Judge Andrew Reddy
Griqua offered to help her find them. MPR was extremely angry, as Griqua had implied that her boyfriend had been romantically attracted to the other woman and so agreed to go with Griqua without knowing exactly where they were headed.
They arrived at a house and Griqua suggested that they hide in a room to trap LC. They did so, and after waiting a while she realised that LC was not coming. This prompted MPR to ask Griqua to accompany her home.
At this point, he switched on the light in the room, pulled a knife out of his pocket and threatened to kill MPR if she didn’t remain silent. He then raped her three times.
She left the scene, but against her will, he accompanied her to find transport and gave her some money. She reported the rape to the driver of the transport and then to her brother. She was medically examined that day by a doctor who concluded that she had sustained no visible injuries.
Griqua said the trial court had over-emphasised the interests of the public and negated his personal circumstances. He said he had been only 36 at the time and a first offender.
He said a life sentence “left no room for him to be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society”. Griqua said he was unmarried and the father of twin girls aged one year and four months who lived with their mother. He worked as a gardener earning about R2,000 a month.
After his arrest for rape, he had been released on bail, but this was cancelled when he was arrested on another matter.
Reddy said the “ingenious way” Griqua had sought to ensnare MPR by creating a ruse of her boyfriend’s infidelity made the crime premeditated. This was aggravated when he secured her submission and co-operation with the aid of a weapon.
“The interests of society must be afforded due consideration. The role of society should not, however, be elevated or overemphasised in this process of proportionality. When the interests of society are considered, it is not what society demands that should determine the sentence but what the informed reasonable member of that community believes to be a sentence that would be just,” Reddy said.
“To my mind, at the age of 36, the appellant could not have been described as a callow youth.”
He went on to criticise the disrespect with which the trial had been handled.
“A plethora of unacceptable remarks by the regional magistrate tainted the decorum of the proceedings and impugned the dignity of the appellant,” he said.
Reddy referred to the magistrate’s comments in his judgment on the sentence where he said: “And look what the accused did, is doing. He goes to her, takes advantage of her vulnerability around that time and he lied to her. Saying that your boyfriend went to this specific place and he is with another woman. Even when they arrive there, he does not feel sorry for this complainant. ”
He said the magistrate added to his disparaging remarks when he stated: “I am quite aware that when it comes to the offence of rape itself, the accused is a first offender. But it shows that this is a gentleman that has always been struggling to keep his hands away from other people’s properties — and look what happened now: he could not keep his penis away from the complainant.”
“The work of a court and of all who appear before it is a serious business. The words spoken, written and made decisions have far-reaching consequences on all intimately involved ... Utterances alluded to by the regional magistrate have no place in our court rooms.”
Reddy dismissed Griqua’s appeal, finding the magistrate “was correct in finding that there were no substantial compelling circumstances that warranted a deviation from the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment”.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.