Way back in May, her ex-boyfriend, Nico Venter, was arrested by the police. He was then released on R10 000 bail. This left relatives and friends angry and unhappy.

Johan Smit was a bit more down-to-earth. When commenting on the bail, he said:

“People say you are innocent until the court finds you guilty. I assume if he has not been convicted yet, I must accept the court’s decision”.

We discovered that Nico Venter was questioned by police on March 12 and that later in March he was asked to go back to the police offices. On legal advice he refused and was arrested later that day. He was later released to appear in court.

The following day we are told that the police are searching for a second suspect. They did not name the suspect or provide any other information. Now, months later, a second arrest is yet to be forthcoming.

A week or so later on March 21 it was reported that super-sleuth Brigadier Piet Byleveld had been called in by local police to assist in the case. He has not discussed why he was being brought into the case.

What is strange to me is that Nico Venter was granted bail and then Piet Byleveld is brought in on the case. I have a number of questions:

Surely someone suspected of commiting such a gruesome murder would have bail denied?

Why is Byleveld being brought in AFTER the arrest if they have their man?

Related posts:

1. No progress on the Anike Smit murder investigation? There has still been absolutely no word by the police...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

In December 2005, Andries Mashele’s wife told him that she was leaving him. He was so enraged that he took his gun and murdered his wife and 4 year old son. He then turned the gun on himself, but survived.

Now Judge Ronel Tolmay of the Pretoria High Court has convicted him without ANY jail time at all!

Mashele got 10 years imprisonment, suspended for 5 years. He also has to complete 800 hours community service and to pay his deceased wife’s family a mere R2000.

The judge said that he was not the kind of individual who should be removed from society.

This judgement is disgusting and is typical for the ridiculous overly-liberal ‘justice’ system we have in place now.

Justice is not meant to be about the offender, it is about giving redress to the victims. In this case the living victims are the friends and family of Sibongile Mahlangu, and his four-year-old son, Theo. What sense of hustice do these victims feel?

Andries Mashele deprived TWO people of their lives, one of which was an innocent child. No matter what his motives were, he deserves to lose his liberty – at least for an extended period of time. THAT would be justice!

What does it take these days for murderers to get any length of time in prison?

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

These terrible things got so much worse when South Africa stopped using the death penalty.

Some Arguments for the Death Penalty

- Some argue that the death of a criminal gives closure to their victim’s (if they are still alive) and their families.

- The death penalty serves as a deterrent to criminals who may be considering committing a capital offence.

- One of the main principals of punishment and the judicial system is that the penalty fits the crime. If someone violently murders another individual or numerous people, then it makes sense for the punishment to be death.

- Some anti-death penalty campaigners describe examples of people on death row, or people have already been killed have then been proved innocent. Today, the accuracy of modern forensics and DNA testing makes it very unlikely for an innocent person to be put on death row. Furthering this point, it is argued that the number of innocent people that may be killed is equalised by the number of actual criminals that are set free.

- Putting people in prison, as opposed to executing them gives them a chance of parole (or the small chance of escape), meaning they can commit more crimes. Capital punishment means there is no chance of the criminal committing another crime.

Some Arguments Against the Death Penalty

- The financial cost of putting people to death, once you consider extra appeals, additional procedures etc, can often be more than the cost of putting a criminal in prison for life.

- The death penalty is “cruel and unusual”

- It is simply immoral and barbaric to allow people to be killed by the state even if they have committed violent crimes.

- The appeals and additional procedures required to deal with criminals that have been condemned to death fill up the legal system which could be put to better use.

- It can be viewed that, life in prison with little freedom and poor quality of life is a better punishment and deterrent to criminals than death row.

- There is always the possibility that innocent men and women are put to death without ever having committed a crime. There will always be failings in the judicial and conviction system.

The problem with not having a death penalty is that there is no real alternative punishment. Criminals received almost a slap on the wrist these days. In Durban a few years ago, a man murdered three old ladies in their home. He received eight years, which means he was probably out and walking the streets in less than four years. Is this justice?

I feel that in light of the massive increase in murder and violence, that we should be debating and considering the use of the death penalty again!

Related posts:

1. Youth need to learn consequences of bad behaviour! Brittany Mitchell, the KwaZulu-Natal teenager who was arrested on charges...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Now it must be noted that the withdrawal, or diversion, of charges is used to prevent minors or adults with minor offences from going through court procedures and rather receive rehabilitative assistance.

So what exactly is classified as a “minor offence” these days if conspiracy to commit murder falls in that category?

This worrying court decision is quite rampant in the UK these days, where so many people have been pretty much “let off” without barely a slap on the wrist. The result of this in the UK has been a rise in crime, particularly amongst the youth. These young offenders have grown up knowing that nothing will be done to them, regardless of the crime committed.

We can already see this attitude amongst the youth of South Africa. Over the past ten years we have seen a massive rise in serious youth crime, including murder, rape and violence. It is court decisions such as this that can only fuel this “untouchable” belief amongst the youth and further fuel this out-of-control behaviour.

My personal feeling is that we need to bring back firm discipline to the schools and homes, as well as firm action by the courts. Kids need to know that there are boundaries and that when they cross them, there are severe consequences!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The trial should be interesting with some similar faces as in the van der Vyver trial. The chief investigating officer is none other than Director Attie Trollip and the lead prosecutor is state advocate Christhenus van der Vyfjer.

Many people who have been following the Inge Lotz murder trial, will also be closely scrutinizing the van Rooyen trial to see how the ‘team’ handles the prosecution and what went on in the investigation.

Both Trollip and van der Vyfjer have received some negative press regarding the van der Vyver investigation and trial. On the other hand other people have lauded their work. As the van der Vyver trial is not yet over, it is difficult to see what the judge and accessors think.

The van Rooyen case also features private investigators, alibis and of course the bantering between state and defence.

The judge in the van Rooyen trial is Justice Nathan Erasmus and the defence team is made up of Lunen Meyer and advocate Terry Price.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.