IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA 
[WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN]

V

JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 11 FEBRUARY 2013

INTRODUCTION

[2] The appellant’s sentence reads as follows:
‘
[3] The appellant now appeals against the sentence only.

[5] The appellant was charged with rape in terms of the Criminal Law Amendment Act (Sexual Offences and Related Matters), Act 32 of 2007. In terms of this legislation, “rape” is defined as:

[6] The Criminal Law Amendment Act 32 of 2007 defines “rape” as in para [5]
above and “sexual penetration” as follows:
“

whatsoever by -
(a) the genital organs of one person into or beyond the genital organs, anus, or mouth of another person;

(c) the genital organs of an animal, into or beyond the mouth of another person,

[8] Even though this appeal is only against sentence, during oral argument counsel was asked to file supplementary heads regarding the correctness of the convictions in this case, specifically whether the crimes might have constituted one single incident of rape or three separate and distinct incidences of rape, resulting in a duplication of convictions.

[11] The State treated these five acts as forming the subject of three charges of
rape. It is clear from the complainant’s evidence that there were a number of rapes committed, i.e. two sexual penetrations in the anus, two sexual penetrations in the mouth and one sexual penetration in the vagina.
[12] The first two convictions justified the imposition of life imprisonment, because she was raped more than once in both instances, whilst the third conviction justifies the imposition of 10 (ten) years’ imprisonment, because it was a single rape and the appellant was a first offender, in our view appellant was not prejudiced by this manner of charging.

[18] In the circumstances I would make the following order:

Appellant is sentenced to 20 (twenty) years’ imprisonment on all three charges taken together for purposes of sentence.

FORTUIN, J
I agree, and it is so ordered.