Leave to appeal secondary charge granted

A HANDYMAN, convicted murderer and conman has only partially succeeded in trying to lessen his lengthy sentence for the killing of his employer.

In December 2014, Anthony Strauss strangled his employer, Lerusha Govender, with an electrical cord following a payment dispute that turned violent. He then fled in Govender’s sports car, which he tried to pawn.

Last year, Strauss was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder, with an additional 15 years for robbery with aggravating circumstances for stealing Govender’s car.

Strauss admitted to the murder in court, claiming it was a crime of passion. Yesterday, however, he filed for leave to appeal the convictions on both charges.

Yet, during proceedings in the high court sitting in Randburg, Strauss’s lawyer, Kevin Lawlor, argued it was the robbery conviction that was unjust and should be downgraded to theft.

According to Lawlor, the State had used Strauss’s intent to kill Govender to also pin the robbery charge on his client. This splitting of intention was a major issue, said Lawlor, as his client had not killed Govender to steal her car. As she had been dead for some time before he absconded with the car, the crime was a lesser one of theft, and not a direct intention to rob Govender.

But State prosecutor Nerisha Naidoo argued that Strauss had always intended to rob Govender, as she owed him money for fixing up her Paulshof, Sandton, home.

She insisted that without the murder, he never would have been able to steal her car, meaning he did intend to rob her. Naidoo also claimed that because the argument revolved around money that Govender allegedly owed Strauss, the robbery had to have been part of his plan to get his pay.

She said the court’s decision to convict Strauss on both charges needed to be upheld, and that if permission to appeal were granted, Strauss had little chance of having his sentenced reduced.

But Judge Solly Sithole disagreed with Naidoo, saying that while it was clear the court was correct in finding Strauss guilty of murder and sentencing him to life, another court may believe that he was only guilty of theft for the second charge.

He was adamant that if an appeal was lodged, it would be applicable only against the robbery charge.

Robbery charge ruling may be contested, but not the murder count

“I am not sure whether this was an improper splitting of the intent… Another court could come to another conclusion,” Judge Sithole said.

He said that if Strauss so desired, he could bring his appeal to a panel of judges for them to decide, which could potentially help create case law that could be applied in other such trials. “(But) count 1 (murder) remains intact and untouched,” he added.