Father and Son Fail to Overturn Sentence for Brutal Axe and Panga Attack

A father and son convicted of attempting to murder a man in a vicious attack with an axe and a panga have failed in their bid to reduce their seven-year prison sentences. Marcelino Goliath, 28, and his father Piet Sederstroom, 57, had appealed against the sentences imposed by the Oudtshoorn Regional Court for the brutal assault on Henry Coetzee in Bridgton on 22 August 2021.

The pair, armed with deadly weapons, arrived at the home of Coetzee’s aunt seeking revenge over an alleged robbery. When Coetzee denied any knowledge of the incident, Sederstroom swung his axe at him, narrowly missing. What followed was a sustained and brutal attack that left Coetzee permanently disabled.

According to court records, Coetzee initially fled into a room with two others, but remained after they escaped through an opening, believing he had nothing to fear since he had done nothing wrong. When he opened the door to leave, both men set upon him with their weapons. The assault was relentless. Coetzee, unarmed, could only defend himself with his forearms until he could no longer lift his arms and collapsed. Even as he lay motionless on the ground, the attackers continued their onslaught, only stopping when they believed he was dead.

Medical evidence revealed the severity of the violence. Dr Van der Linde’s report documented serious trauma to Coetzee’s head, face, arms, hands, fingers, and legs, describing the injuries as life-threatening. Coetzee survived but was left permanently disabled and now receives a disability grant. In dismissing the appeal, the court found that the trial magistrate had properly exercised her sentencing discretion. The court noted that the magistrate had carefully balanced the personal circumstances of both accused against the seriousness of the crime and society’s interests.

The case took an unusual procedural turn when the High Court indicated it was considering increasing the sentences. After being notified of this possibility, the appellants attempted to withdraw their appeal, but the court refused permission, as it found no good cause for the withdrawal.

In his judgment, Acting Judge Moosa emphasised that sentencing is not a mechanical process but requires careful calibration of competing interests. He noted that while the appellants had no prior criminal records (in the case of Sederstroom) and had dependents, these factors were outweighed by the premeditated nature of the attack, the substantial violence used, and the lack of genuine remorse.

The court thus rejected the defence’s arguments that the magistrate had under-emphasised rehabilitation prospects and personal circumstances. Judge Moosa stated that in cases of serious violent crime, an accused’s personal circumstances recede into the background while society’s interests in crime prevention and deterrence assume greater significance.

Although the judges initially considered imposing harsher sentences, they ultimately decided against it, showing deference to the trial court’s discretion. Judge Moosa noted that while he might have imposed a longer sentence had he been the trial judge, the seven-year term was neither shocking nor disturbingly inappropriate. Both men were also declared unfit to possess firearms under the Firearms Control Act.

The judgment serves as a reminder that courts will not hesitate to impose substantial prison terms for violent crimes, particularly when victims are left with life-altering injuries.

You can real the full Goliath v S sentence appeal judgement here.