Judge rebukes Dundee magistrate for harsh sentence of mother caught stealing roll-ons

the judge replaced her imprisonment punishment with a suspended sentence of six months suspended for five years. File

the judge replaced her imprisonment punishment with a suspended sentence of six months suspended for five years. File

Published Sep 11, 2024

Share

The Pietermaritzburg High Court has ordered the immediate release of a mother who was sentenced to three years in prison for stealing two Nivea roll-ons valued at R75.

Acting Judge MJ Chetty ruled that the magistrate in the Dundee Magistrate’s Court had imposed an excessively harsh punishment on the mother, who remains unnamed to protect her child.

The judge stated that the mother posed no threat to society and thus did not warrant imprisonment. Additionally, the judge criticised the magistrate for failing to consider the care arrangements for the child during the mother’s imprisonment.

When the court inquired about the whereabouts of her child while she was awaiting trial, as she had been denied bail, the mother said she had no idea. She assumed the child was staying with the neighbours.

The matter came before the high court as an automatic review of her punishment by the lower court.

In ordering her immediate release, the judge replaced her imprisonment punishment with a suspended sentence of six months suspended for five years.

The accused appeared in the Dundee Magistrates’ Court, facing a theft charge for stealing two Nivea roll-ons from a local store on July 18 of this year.

She admitted guilt, explaining that she had put the roll-ons in her pocket because she needed them but could not afford to pay for them.

The prosecution during her trial pointed out that she had three previous convictions for petty theft and that it was time that she now realised that crime did not pay.

The accused, who handled her own defence, in mitigation of sentence said she was looking after her child as a single unemployed mother and with the aid of a child support grant of R350. She asked the court for a “small sentence” and said as she did not have parents or a husband, there was no one to take care of her child.

The prosecution on the other hand said she has not learned from her past mistakes as she continues to make the same mistakes. The magistrate was also told by the prosecution that small business owners, such as the shop from which the accused stole, look at the court to ensure that justice is served.

The magistrate, in sentencing the woman, said petty theft is both serious and prevalent, not only in the district, but also throughout the country. He said the court deals with these matters on a daily basis.

He added that despite the value of the items being only R75, it is a huge amount for the owner to lose, as his livelihood is running the store and that’s how he supports himself and his family. “Should the business suffer, it would lead to retrenchments and worse the closure of the business. Business owners spend a huge amount of money on security as a result of persons such as the accused,” the magistrate said.

In referring to the fact that the mother said she did not have money to buy the roll-ons, the magistrate said she should have waited until she had the money to buy it. He further commented that “she did not love her child because if she did, she would have thought of the child before committing the offence.”

In sentencing her to direct imprisonment, he said she should serve as an example that this kind of behaviour will not be tolerated.

Judge Chetty, however, said it is clear that the sentence imposed is disproportionate and the magistrate placed undue weight on the fact that the accused had previous convictions for similar offences.

“The public interest is harmed rather than served by sentences that are out of all proportion to the gravity of the offence. While it may be justifiable up to a point to impose escalating sentences on offenders who keep on repeating the same offence, there are boundaries to the extent to which sentences for petty crimes can be increased.”

The judge added that, thus, a thief who steals a loaf of bread should not have to go to jail for 10 years because he has stolen countless loaves of bread, one at a time, in the past. His sentence should never escalate with the passage of time from a few weeks for initial offences, to a few months, eventually to years, and then to many years; the offence remains a petty crime, no matter how often it is repeated.

Pretoria News

zelda.venter@inl.co.za