Convicted rapist and repeat offender, Amos Khumalo will have to wait a little bit longer for his sentence to be handed down on the rape and kidnapping charges he is facing. Khumalo was initially charged with two counts of rape and kidnapping after he lured two minors from Lotus Garden to a Pretoria Hotel where he allegedly raped them in November 2020.
But he was convicted of rape of one child and attempted rape of the other one. The Pretoria Magistrate Court heard the case for mitigation of sentencing against the 47-year-old on Monday.
Defense lawyer Anton Rudman argued that his client showed remorse when he pleaded guilty to the charges saying “he saved the victims secondary trauma of coming to court” and “he didn’t want them to suffer any further”. Rudman told court that under the circumstances a `15-year sentence might be too lenient’ however, life imprisonment is too harsh a sentence for his client and a life sentence is also `disproportionate’ to the evidence before the court.
“I submit under the circumstances that a sentence of 20-years will probably be more proportionate with the crime the accused has pleaded guilty to,” said Rudman.
Rudman said the court should take into account that Khumalo, will be eligible for parole only at the ripe age of 73 if he is slapped with a minimum sentence arguing that `he will be regarded as a senior, an age that will be difficult for him to remain in prison’.
However, the State prosecutor, Dru Ramsamy said the harshest sentence should be meted against the repeat offender. “But should the court deviate from the minimum sentence under this circumstance for lack of a better word, are we going to let a two-time rapist back on to our streets when he has clearly shown disregard that he is in fact caught? His attitude is `Oh well’ because he was on parole when he did this,” argued Ramsamy.
“The initial deviation from the minimum sentence from his first previous conviction has brought us here today with two more victims and their families. Can that be justified in terms of section 51 subsection 2A? It cannot,” she added.
Ramsamy told court that the 11-year-old and the 13-year-old are subjected to secondary trauma “every time they remember” and what they go through everyday and Khumalo only pleaded guilty because of overwhelming evidence against him.
“He pleaded guilty after the DNA results pointed to him positively. My learned colleague argued at length that this is a sign of remorse. No, it is a sign that the evidence before me is so strong that I have no possibility of succeeding (defending the accused). It is not a sign of remorse,” said Ramsamy. The matter was postponed to 6 December for sentencing.
