Outjo Police Station arson sentence cut on appeal

AN Outjo area resident who was jailed for 10 years for his role in the theft and burning of Police dockets after a break-in at the Outjo Police Station was rewarded handsomely last week for his decision to appeal against his sentence.

Louis Steenkamp, who lived at farm Saalburg close to Outjo before his arrest and eventual imprisonment, started last week facing the prospect of serving out a 10-year prison sentence, which would have ended in August 2017. By the end of the week, his sentence had been cut to two years’ imprisonment, of which almost one year has already been served.Steenkamp – then a 35-year-old father of four children and a first offender – was sentenced in the Outjo Magistrate’s Court on August 7 last year, after he pleaded guilty to theft and defeating or obstructing the course of justice.The Magistrate sentenced Steenkamp to five years’ imprisonment on each of the charges, and ordered that the sentences be served consecutively, leaving Steenkamp with an effective 10 years to serve.Steenkamp’s appeal was heard by Judge President Petrus Damaseb and Acting Judge Annel Silungwe in the High Court in Windhoek on Monday last week.The Judges ordered that the sentences on each of the charges would be replaced with two two-year jail terms, which were ordered to be served concurrently.A three-year sentence would have been appropriate for the crime of defeating or obstructing the course of justice, but for Steenkamp this was reduced to two years because of the time he had already spent in custody before being sentenced, the Judge President commented.Steenkamp was facing a rape charge when an office at the Outjo Police Station was burgled on the evening of August 22 2006 and 10 Police dockets were stolen.The break-in was carried out by a friend of Steenkamp, Dawid Schrader, who later returned to the Police office after he and Steenkamp realised that the docket on Steenkamp’s rape case was not amongst those stolen.Schrader poured petrol into the office and set it on fire, destroying some 64 dockets in the process.He and Steenkamp also burned the dockets he had stolen from the office.Schrader was sentenced to an effective six years’ imprisonment.Lawyer Helmut Stolze, representing Steenkamp, suggested to the two Judges that Steenkamp should have been sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment on the theft charge and a fine of N$1 000 or a 12-month jail term on the second charge.In a judgement written by Judge President Damaseb, the Judges agreed that the cumulative effect of the sentences imposed on Steenkamp “induces a sense of shock”, but did not agree that the sentences Stolze suggested would have been appropriate.They agreed that a misdirection by the Magistrate occurred when it was recorded that Steenkamp had been convicted of being an accomplice before the fact to the theft of 10 dockets, whereas he had pleaded guilty only to being an accomplice before the fact to the theft of a single docket.The Magistrate also did not take into account that by the time he was sentenced, Steenkamp had already spent almost a year in custody, the Judges found.The Judges emphasised that Steenkamp’s crimes were serious and warranted a direct term, even if he was a first offender.”Theft of Police dockets goes to the heart of the administration of justice and fine niceties such as what exactly was on the docket before it was stolen should not hinder a court in acting firmly against those who steal Police dockets,” Judge President Damaseb stated.To merely give someone who defeats or obstructs the course of justice by destroying dockets “the proverbial slap on the wrist” would send the wrong message, the Judge President remarked: “It is a notorious fact that our law enforcement agencies face serious logistical and personnel challenges due to lack of funds.Investigation of crime is, therefore, very difficult: Visiting scenes of crime on time and tracing complainants and witnesses, and taking down statements is therefore an enormous challenge.Deliberately destroying Police dockets is therefore a very serious matter in Namibia and even first offenders must expect custodial sentences for stealing and or destroying Police dockets.A fine for such offences would be most inappropriate.”The case that in the first place prompted Steenkamp and Schrader to steal the dockets has, in the meantime, also been finalised.Steenkamp was found not guilty on the rape charge he faced.By the end of the week, his sentence had been cut to two years’ imprisonment, of which almost one year has already been served.Steenkamp – then a 35-year-old father of four children and a first offender – was sentenced in the Outjo Magistrate’s Court on August 7 last year, after he pleaded guilty to theft and defeating or obstructing the course of justice.The Magistrate sentenced Steenkamp to five years’ imprisonment on each of the charges, and ordered that the sentences be served consecutively, leaving Steenkamp with an effective 10 years to serve.Steenkamp’s appeal was heard by Judge President Petrus Damaseb and Acting Judge Annel Silungwe in the High Court in Windhoek on Monday last week.The Judges ordered that the sentences on each of the charges would be replaced with two two-year jail terms, which were ordered to be served concurrently.A three-year sentence would have been appropriate for the crime of defeating or obstructing the course of justice, but for Steenkamp this was reduced to two years because of the time he had already spent in custody before being sentenced, the Judge President commented.Steenkamp was facing a rape charge when an office at the Outjo Police Station was burgled on the evening of August 22 2006 and 10 Police dockets were stolen.The break-in was carried out by a friend of Steenkamp, Dawid Schrader, who later returned to the Police office after he and Steenkamp realised that the docket on Steenkamp’s rape case was not amongst those stolen.Schrader poured petrol into the office and set it on fire, destroying some 64 dockets in the process.He and Steenkamp also burned the dockets he had stolen from the office.Schrader was sentenced to an effective six years’ imprisonment.Lawyer Helmut Stolze, representing Steenkamp, suggested to the two Judges that Steenkamp should have been sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment on the theft charge and a fine of N$1 000 or a 12-month jail term on the second charge.In a judgement written by Judge President Damaseb, the Judges agreed that the cumulative effect of the sentences imposed on Steenkamp “induces a sense of shock”, but did not agree that the sentences Stolze suggested would have been appropriate.They agreed that a misdirection by the Magistrate occurred when it was recorded that Steenkamp had been convicted of being an accomplice before the fact to the theft of 10 dockets, whereas he had pleaded guilty only to being an accomplice before the fact to the theft of a single docket.The Magistrate also did not take into account that by the time he was sentenced, Steenkamp had already spent almost a year in custody, the Judges found.The Judges emphasised that Steenkamp’s crimes were serious and warranted a direct term, even if he was a first offender.”Theft of Police dockets goes to the heart of the administration of justice and fine niceties such as what exactly was on the docket before it was stolen should not hinder a court in acting firmly against those who steal Police dockets,” Judge President Damaseb stated.To merely give someone who defeats or obstructs the course of justice by destroying dockets “the proverbial slap on the wrist” would send the wrong message, the Judge President remarked: “It is a notorious fact that our law enforcement agencies face serious logistical and personnel challenges due to lack of funds.Investigation of crime is, therefore, very difficult: Visiting scenes of crime on time and tracing complainants and witnesses, and taking down statements is therefore an enormous challenge.Deliberately destroying Police dockets is therefore a very serious matter in Namibia and even first offenders must expect custodial sentences for stealing and or destroying Police dockets.A fine for such offences would be most inappropriate.”The case that in the first place prompted Steenkamp and Schrader to steal the dockets has, in the meantime, also been finalised.Steenkamp was found not guilty on the rape charge he faced.