A 15-year-old boy who raped a four-year-old received a lifeline after the high court overturned his sentence of 10 years' compulsory residence in a youth facility and reduced it to five years.
This as the magistrate who had sentenced him was not empowered to force him to spend 10 years at the centre.
The Bloemfontein High Court also criticised the magistrate for totally forgetting that she was dealing with a child offender, who was 16 when he was sentenced, as she, during her comments, said although he was still at school, she felt he should make a financial contribution towards the victim’s family.
The matter landed before the high court on an automatic review of the lower courts’ proceedings, as it involved a child offender.
The teenager pleaded guilty to the rape. According to the accused, he stated that he was told by his friends to experiment with the (tsubi tsubi) game (sexual intercourse). The accused decided to have sexual intercourse with the 4-year-old victim.
The incident took place at the victim’s home at the chicken coop where he penetrated her.
A social worker recommended that the child receive a non-custodial sentence to give him a chance in life. It was said that considering the accused’s age, he is a minor and he is attending school, and no behavioural challenges were reported. The accused understands his wrongdoing and takes responsibility for the offence and shows remorse.
A victim impact report was handed to court, and the mother said the little victim was taken to hospital after the rape. The mother indicated that the child sustained some injuries to her genitals.
It appears, according to the report, that the rape incident was traumatic to the child as well as to the mother.
The mother indicated that the pain which her daughter went through during the rape incident brought trauma to their lives. The child would wake up in the middle of the night due to nightmares, and sometimes she struggles to sleep.
The child’s mother explained further that the rape incident has brought anger and hostility to her daughter. The child would shout and scream at her little brother for no apparent reason, which affected the siblings’ relations and the relationship with the family.
Regarding the financial aspects, the rape incident had, according to the report, a negative impact on the family’s finances. The biological mother of the child, according to the report, had to pay taxi fare to take the child to the hospital for medical treatment and check-ups.
A probation officer said a portion of the household income that was supposed to be utilised for meeting the survival needs of the family was used to transport the child and the mother to and from the hospital for treatment.
The magistrate commented that the child offender should financially compensate the victim's family for their loss.
In addressing the accused, the magistrate also incorrectly stated: “I want to advise you at this stage that rape of a minor renders you liable for imprisonment for life.”
In considering the magistrate’s reasons for sentencing, it appears first of all that she did not take into account the young age of the accused, other than sending him to a youth facility, Acting Judge JJ Hefer said.
“The age of the accused obviously did not play any role in consideration of the period that the accused is to be imprisoned. On the contrary, it appears that the magistrate at some point lost sight of the accused’s age when she stated that the accused, although attending school and being 16 years of age, should make a financial contribution towards the victim and the family of the victim.”
The judge said the magistrate also failed in totality to deal with the recommendation pertaining to correctional supervision contained in a social worker’s report.
“In view of the seriousness of the crime, pertaining to in particular the very young age of the victim, correctional supervision is not regarded as a suitable sentence for the accused, but the magistrate should at least have taken into account the age of the accused in sentencing and particularly sentencing the accused to a form of detention,” the judge said in reducing the sentence.
WhatsApp your views on this story at 071 485 7995.
Pretoria News