Burglar’s sentence reduced
IT WAS third time lucky for a housebreaker when the Supreme Court of Appeal found that he could not be blamed for the fact that his accomplice took a firearm when they broke into a Mamelodi spaza shop.
Five judges of that court found that Danny Leshilo should not have been convicted of the joint possession of an illegal firearm and ammunition, because his mate had the firearm.
The Pretoria Regional Court had slapped Leshilo with a 15-year jail sentence for housebreaking and the firearm charges.
He appealed to the high court but the high court agreed that the doctrine of common purpose was proved as Leshilo knew his co-accused had a firearm with him.
The appeal court, however, held that it could never be said that Leshilo was in joint possession of the firearm which his mate had carried.
Leshilo broke into the spaza shop of a Mr Mahlangu and his partner at their home in Mamelodi East. On the night of the break in, the pair had forgotten R1 700 on a table in the shop.
Mahlangu woke up in the early hours to find a man pointing a firearm at him. He recognised the gunman as one of his customers. He jumped out of bed and threw a blanket over the intruder.
They wrestled for the firearm and a shot went off. The intruder fled, but by that time Lesjhilo had entered the room. Mahlangu pointed the firearm at him.
Neighbours, who heard the shot, caught Leshilo as he too tried to flee.
A neighbour handed Leshilo to the community who had gathered in the yard and they tied him to a gate pole until the police arrived. He, along with the firearm, was handed over to the police.
The cash had meanwhile disappeared from the table, but no one saw who took it.
The court replaced Leshilo’s 15 year sentence with a five-year jail sentence.