/ 9 November 2005

State appeals against 12-year-old murderer’s sentence

The state on Wednesday told the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) that the high-court trial of a 12-year-old murderer was ”identified in emotion”.

”The child was 12 years old, it is understandable, but when the matter is handled in court, we must put emotions aside,” state advocate Sandesh Sankar said.

The state is appealing against the sentence imposed on a Pietermaritzburg girl who became South Africa’s youngest female killer in 2004.

She was found guilty on charges of murder and theft after killing Radha Govender, a woman with whom she lived.

The girl was sentenced to correctional supervision and community service.

Sankar also submitted to a full Bench — of five judges — that the Natal High Court judgement was also approached with emotion.

”There are aggravating circumstances in the case, which were ignored by the high-court judgement.”

Arguing on the seriousness of the crime, Sankar said: ”How evil can you get in murdering your care-giver?”

Sankar also argued that the high-court judgement ignored evidence by expert witnesses on the level of the girl’s intelligence and maturity.

He argued that she was far above the emotional maturity of a child of 12 years, her age when she committed the crime.

Referring to the fact that the girl had planned and manipulated two adults into the crime, Sankar said he had never come across a 12-year-old with that level of thinking.

He said the fact that she could fabricate the story that she did on instructions of adults showed considerable maturity for a 12-year-old.

”That was genius, but [it] does not come from a 12-year-old’s thinking, I admit.”

Her two accomplices are serving life sentences.

Sankar also submitted that the defence’s argument that conditions in prison were not conducive to a 12-year-old’s well-being was wrong.

Sankar argued that the SCA can ensure that a conducive environment, regarding education and emotional growth, can take place by an order of the court.

Sankar also submitted that the SCA should consider a term of direct imprisonment.

The defence was to argue its case after the lunch break. — Sapa