Momberg’s problem is that she isn’t really sorry – advocate

If convicted racist Vicki Momberg had shown true remorse, it is possible she may have escaped her two-year effective jail sentence on four counts of crimen injuria.

She was also ordered by the Equality Court to pay R100 000 to Constable David Makhondo, the police officer at whom Momberg had directed her tirade.

Speaking to The Citizen in general terms yesterday outside the Randburg Magistrates’ Court, advocate Manni Witz said remorse was probably the most important part of any case when it came to sentencing.

“A recent Supreme Court of Appeal case, the State v Matyityi, talks about penitence versus remorse. When you’re penitent for something, you’re truly remorseful, and they say when you’re truly remorseful you really have to take the court into your confidence and put yourself into their hands, and then the court can take this into account,” Witz noted.

Simply pleading guilty and apologising was no longer enough, Witz said.

Coincidentally, Magistrate Pravina Raghoonandan referred to the same judgment when sentencing Momberg.

The precedent judgment, penned by Justice Visvanathan Ponnan, states in part: “Many accused persons might well regret their conduct but that does not without more translate to genuine remorse. Remorse is a gnawing pain of conscience for the plight of another. Thus genuine contrition can only come from an appreciation and acknowledgment of extent of one’s error.”

Since the video of Momberg hurling the k-word at police officers who came to assist her broke in June 2016, Momberg has chewed her way through at least three lawyers – Nardus Grové, Jenna Clark and Joe Davidowitz – and is now being represented pro bono by attorney Kingdom Onah and advocate Kevin Lawlor. They are bringing her appeal against her conviction and sentence, something which is sure to cement a widespread view about her lack of remorse.

Senior public prosecutor Yusuf Baba tore into Momberg’s application, saying it was fatally flawed and must be dismissed.

Bringing a motion before proceedings started, Baba said her application – prepared by Lawlor – was a “diatribe of 17 pages criticising the judgment, analysing it entirely incorrectly”.

Lawlor based Momberg’s appeal against her conviction on several points. These included that Raghoonandan had erred and misdirected herself on accepting the evidence of the State in totality.

“On this aspect alone, it is vague and does not specify specifically what the State has to meet and what are the grounds accepted in order for the State to respond,” said Baba.

Lawlor’s submission also stated crimen injuria had not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the authenticity of video and audio evidence had not been tested, and her 10111 call was inadmissible – also because its authenticity could not be guaranteed.

Baba noted Momberg’s previous attorney had allowed the recordings to be submitted uncontested.

Lawlor withdrew his application in order to resubmit it by Friday to the court, which was adjourned until Wednesday.

“One k****r is bad enough. This happens all the time, all the time. The k****rs here in Johannesburg are terrible, I’m so sick of it,” Momburg was recorded in in just two of 48 instances of her use of the racial slur.