SKYY Vodka is known for its distinctive smooth taste. When two men appeared in the Nelspruit Magistrate’s court on Monday after allegedly trying to steal two bottles of vodka on Friday, their smooth-talking skills were put to the test.
They indicated that they would represent themselves in court, but were advised that mere smooth-talking will not do the trick.
Magistrate Ms Faith Mogale listed the charges against Messrs Mthobisi Hadebe (25) and Xolani Collins Malikani (29). “You are charged with the attempted theft of one bottle of SKYY Vodka and one bottle of SKYY Vanilla. The value of these items amounts to R409.”
The attempted theft was reported by an unidentified complainant on Friday. Hadebe and Malikani, who pleaded not guilty, wanted to represent themselves in court, but Mogale advised them that this was a bad idea. She illustrated this by testing the accused’s knowledge of criminal law with a quick quiz. “You need to know what you are agreeing to when you elect to represent yourselves. When someone is accused of an offence, the Criminal Procedure Act may help them in proving their innocence. However, you need to know how to use it. Now, tell me about Section 174 of the Act. What does it say?”
Hadebe and Malikani had no idea that this section may be used by an accused to apply for a discharge if the state’s evidence against him or her is lacking. Mogale explained that the Criminal Procedure Act was like an empty promise if the person seeking to apply it in court did not know how to do so.
“Without an attorney or legal knowledge required, this case may end badly for you two. The state can provide you with legal representation, free of charge,” she offered. The accused, who were both released on bail of R500, declined this offer and maintained that they would continue to represent themselves when the case resumed on July 17.
Also read: Pille vir kersfees?
