The Palm Ridge Magistrate’s Court finally handed down Karin Blignaut’s verdict and found her guilty on both counts of her charges when she reappeared on August 28.
She faced charges of defeating or obstructing the administration of justice and submitting a false statement in an affidavit.
In a separate matter heard before the South Gauteng High Court, where an interdict application was brought against the complainant in this matter, Rynette Farrar, supporting documents and this supplementary affidavit were used.
The complainant told the court that Blignaut made a false affidavit against her in December 2013. However, the accused pleaded not guilty to the two counts she was charged with, reiterating that she had no intent to make a false affidavit.
During his judgment, magistrate Sibongiseni Zimema said the document was indeed an affidavit and that Blignaut knew it would be used before the South Gauteng High Court.
Court ruling
During her appearance, the court briefly adjourned for Blignaut to consult with her defence ahead of her verdict.
For count one, Zimema said he was satisfied that the State had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Blignaut was then found guilty of contravening the Justices of the Peace and Commissioners of Oaths Act.
ALSO READ: Karin Blignaut’s defence to present their arguments in court
“I do, however, believe the accused is guilty of attempting to defeat the ends of justice,” said Zimema.
As such, before handing down the sentence, Zimema said courts of law were not there when any of the events took place.
ALSO READ: Karin Blignaut remains out on warning, to appear in June
For courts of law to administer justice properly, he said they relied on what witnesses said about the evidence under oath.
“Therefore, to place something that is not true, knowing it’s not true, before a judicial officer, either a judge or a magistrate, is really a bad thing to do. And more often than not, it leads to a serious miscarriage of justice. People suffer. If you have a choice of not making a statement, do not make it. Especially if you know you’re going to say something that is not true,” he said.
Her sentence was then handed down amid an agreement by the defence and the prosecution, given the complainant’s testimony from what she has gone through as a result of the statement.
Blignaut was sentenced in terms of Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977, to compensate the complainant in the amount of R200 000, payable within 72 hours for count one.
For count two, she was sentenced to four months imprisonment, wholly suspended for one year on the condition she is not found guilty of defeating the ends of justice or attempting to defeat the ends of justice.
Affected parties
The complainant’s husband, Adrian Farrar, expressed his dissatisfaction with the verdict, describing the sentence as “seemingly mild”.
“I was disappointed that the powers of a magistrate court aren’t as harsh as they are supposed to be. Her actions resulted in a snowball effect, whereby we lost financially and emotionally. This has taken time to recover from, and that sort of suffering is irreversible,” he said.
He said the financial hardship this has had on them had not ended.
“The Stalingrad tactic has been employed through the more than 35 prior appearances Blignaut had during this State’s case against her. The sentence of threat of jail time [four months] and an order to pay R200 000 is also ineffectual to a wealthy person or criminal,” Farrar explained.
ALSO READ: Karin Blignaut to know her fate
