Cape Town - An Oudtshoorn father convicted of the rape of his intellectually impaired 12-year-old daughter will remain behind bars after his appeal against his sentence failed in the Western Cape High Court.
The 58-year-old man, who impregnated his daughter, was sentenced to life imprisonment in April last year after being convicted.
Child rights organisation Molo Songololo said it was pleased the father’s attempt at a lesser sentence was rejected by the court.
Organisation director Patric Solomons said: “To suggest that the court be lenient to child rapists, and especially fathers who rape and impregnate their children, because of their age, and give older perpetrators and offenders a lesser sentence, is ridiculous. (We are) very pleased that the court rejected this. This can never be a defence for rapists and murderers who are older.”
The father denied any knowledge of the rape and pleaded not guilty during trial.
The girl has been diagnosed with foetal alcohol syndrome and has an estimated mental age of 6 to 9.
Her pregnancy was terminated at 17 weeks through the intervention of a social worker, when the daughter was taken for a medical examination after a relative came to learn of the rape.
High Court Judge Judith Cloete said: “(One of the aunts) asked the complainant who had done this to her, and she tearfully responded that it was (her father).
“They immediately took her to the police station, whereafter she was taken to Bridgton Clinic. Upon examination by a staff sister, it was confirmed that the complainant was 17-weeks pregnant.”
Forensic analyst Warrant Officer Fransonette Slabbert did a DNA analysis of samples taken from the foetus, the daughter and the father, and concluded that it was a 99.99% probability that the father was the biological father of the unborn baby.
“The complainant was to all intents and purposes a young child.
“She had lost her primary attachment figure less than a year before the rape.
“She would thus have been even more emotionally and psychologically dependent on the appellant.
“Given his flat denial of any involvement, and the fact that the pregnancy was only discovered, and the rape revealed, 17 weeks later, coupled with the complainant’s intellectual impairment, there is no basis from which an inference can be drawn that there was no physical injury to her, or that she was not threatened or subjected to some form of violence,” said Judge Cloete.
“It was common cause during the trial that such is the complainant’s impairment that she was unable to express how she felt about the rape other than to produce a simple drawing,” said Cloete.
“Although the copy in the record is of poor quality, it appears to be a stick-like figure with a sad face.
“Having regard to the observations of our courts in relation to the effects of rape on a victim, there is similarly no basis from which an inference can be drawn that the consequences to the complainant are not severe and long-term.
“In the circumstances. the trial court made no material misdirection, nor was the sentence imposed shocking, startling or disturbingly inappropriate or disproportionate. It follows that the appeal cannot succeed,” said Judge Cloete.
Solomons said the courts had a responsibility to protect children, and vulnerable and disabled persons.
“These victims experience extreme trauma when they are violated by those they are dependent on and trust to take care of them and protect them.
“This decision to reject the appeal sends a very strong message to the community, and especially rapists, that our courts take incest, rape and abuse of power very seriously and seek justice for victims and survivors to the full extent of the law,” said Solomons.
Cape Times