After a short break, State Prosecutor, Advocate Gerrit Roberts continued, suggesting various appropriate sentences for the accused.
Read more here:
#KrugersdorpMurders — Remaining three accused to hear their fate today
Among these were life in prison for the murders and 15 years in prison for all the robberies.
Judge Francis asked what the proposed sum total of Marcel’s sentence would be and Roberts said 35 years.
Roberts said that the court should look at Le Roux Steyn as well, as he was also a minor and grew up in the same circumstances. They are very similar in age and Roberts said a correlation should be made between the two. But Le Roux took the plea deal, so Marcel should get a harsher sentence. She would then be considered for parole after completing half of her sentence.
Judge Francis asked what message such a sentence would send out. Roberts explained that such a sentence would send the wrong message.
Valentine’s representative, Amanda Nel, was next and said that it is clear that each matter should be dealt with on its own.
She said they are not suggesting giving him a lesser sentence because he is a first offender, but they are suggesting that his personal and other circumstances be taken into consideration. His personal circumstances include him being a first offender, his age and his schooling. She also asked the court to take into account that Valentine was under the impression that he was doing good.
She said that Valentine was manipulated and brainwashed and that the heinous crimes that were committed could not be reconciled with his life before he joined the group and met Cecilia.
First part in this morning’s proceedings:
#KrugersdorpMurders – State Prosecutor says Marcel should get highest sentence possible
“I concede that he did not voice ‘I acted because of being brainwashed’,” Amanda said.
She went on to say that witnesses testified to being under Cecilia’s spell, and that if the court accepts that claim, Valentine could also have been under Cecilia’s spell, explaining that Valentine was intelligent but gullible, when asked by Judge Francis what power Cecilia had over him.
She asked if the court could fault Valentine for his eyes not opening as soon as those of the other witnesses and questioned what the actual driving force was behind him acting the way he did.
Judge Francis said that the court had been deprived of asking Cecilia about brainwashing and hypnotising Valentine, because it was never put to her in court.
Judge Francis asked what Nel was submitting, and she said that initially Valentine wanted to assist Cecilia.
Judge Francis asked what happened to the beautiful young man that Mikaela’s mother had entrusted her daughter to.
Nel explained that an evil was placed in Valentine, and when he went into hiding he was quickly replaced. She suggested that Valentine cannot be said to be the centre of this case, as he was only a foot soldier.
She said Valentine would not have done what the court found he did if he had not been under Cecilia’s influence and indoctrination.
Next to plead his case was Cecilia’s representative, Andre Coetzer. He started by emphasising that when looking at Cecilia’s personal circumstances, the court is none the wiser because her version of her personal circumstances and that of her parents differ.
Judge Francis then asked if this does not show that she is predisposed to lying, and asked about the sarcastic comment Cecilia made about the judge asking God to come and testify.
Coetzer explained that it was a submissive comment and was not meant to be sarcastic.
Judge Francis then said that there is evidence of her past and personal circumstances that could be corroborated, but asked if there should not have been more than just the basic mitigating factors.
Coetzer continued, saying that it would be subjective for him to come up with a proposed sentence for Cecilia and that he would leave it to the court to decide.
Last was Advocate Sharon Johnson, who argued sentencing for Marcel.
She also said that she would not propose a sentence to the court. She agreed that direct imprisonment should be imposed, but was not sure about the amount of time.
When asked why Marcel did not talk to an attorney to make a deal when she was arrested, Johnson said she believed her client chose her right to remain silent.
“I am going to submit that in all the crimes that Marcel was involved with, her involvement pales in comparison to the involvement of the others,” said Johnson.
Judge Francis asked if Marcel was cunning enough to change her mind when she testified, and Johnson said her client did not want to mislead the court.
She explained that Marcel was still under the spell of her mother and Cecilia for the first part of the trial.
According to her, the psychologist had found Marcel to be honest. She explained this in an attempt to explain how Marcel’s childhood had an effect on her belief in Cecilia and eventually led to her involvement.
