A man who claimed he was falsely accused of raping a 15-year-old girl has lost his appeal against his conviction and life sentence.
The Free State High Court found that the girl’s evidence was supported by other witnesses and medical findings. It rejected the man’s claim that the police had fabricated the rape allegation.
The court also dismissed his argument that life imprisonment was too harsh.
In a judgment delivered on 5 October 2026, Judges Khuduga and Opperman upheld his conviction for rape and assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.
The case arose from an incident in Smithfield on 11 July 2020.
The girl was walking home with her cousin when the man approached them. Her cousin ran home to seek help.
The girl’s brother responded after hearing her crying. He found the man holding her and intervened.
The brother took the girl to their uncle’s home. But the danger had not passed.
The man later attacked the brother. He then pursued the girl and caught up with her near a shop.
The judgment records that he took her to a house and raped her. Police officers arrived and rescued her.
The man denied the allegations. He claimed that he and the girl were in a romantic relationship and that they had not had sex.
He also alleged that police officers had pressured the girl to accuse him of rape. He claimed they threatened to hand him over to a crowd if he did not admit to the offence.
The judges found that the girl’s cousin and brother supported parts of her account. The cousin had witnessed the initial encounter and had run for help. The brother later intervened and saw the man pursuing the girl.
The doctor who examined her recorded genital injuries, including tears, swelling and bleeding. The medical findings were consistent with sexual assault.
The court found that the evidence, considered as a whole, proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.
The judges also rejected the argument that the girl’s evidence should be treated with extra suspicion because she had been a child and a single witness to the rape itself.
The court said her evidence had to be assessed alongside the other evidence. It found that her account was clear and credible.
The man also challenged his life sentence. He argued that the sentence was excessive and that the trial court had failed to consider circumstances that could justify a lesser punishment.
At the time of sentencing, the man was 28 years old. He was unmarried and had no children. He had a Grade 7 education and earned about R2,500 a month from odd jobs.
He had previous convictions for theft, a dangerous-weapons offence and a drug-related offence. He had also spent almost three years in custody while awaiting the finalisation of his case.
The judges found that these personal circumstances did not justify a departure from the prescribed minimum sentence.
The court also considered the effect of the rape on the girl. A victim-impact statement showed that she was afraid to walk in the streets and needed sleeping tablets. Her schoolwork had deteriorated, and she had been moved to another town to continue her education.
The judgment said the seriousness of the offence and its impact on the child justified the sentence.
The judges stressed that courts should impose prescribed minimum sentences in appropriate cases involving gender-based violence against women and children.
The appeal against both conviction and sentence was dismissed. The life sentence remains in force. The three-year sentence for assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm also stands, running concurrently with the life sentence.
