BrahimHemdani 1 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 (edited) Our sentence agreement with Dave King - NPA Bulelwa Makeke 29 August 2013 Authority says businessman entered a plea of guilty on 41 counts of contravening Section 75 of the Income Tax Act The State versus David Cunningham King (Case No: CC 257/2005) 29 Aug 2013 Mr David Cunningham King, the accused in the case of The State versus DC King (Case no.: CC257/2005 - otherwise referred to as the King 1 case), today entered a plea of guilty in the South Gauteng High Court held at Palm Ridge, on 41 counts of various contraventions of section 75 of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, as per the indictment. The said plea is in accordance with a plea and sentence agreement in terms of section 105A(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, entered into between the accused and the National Prosecuting Authority. The High Court was satisfied that the aforesaid agreement complied with the requirements of the provisions of section 105A(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, that the accused admitted the allegations in the above-mentioned counts and that he was guilty of the offences. The Court was moreover satisfied that the sentence agreement was just, whereupon the Court proceeded to convict the accused of the offences and sentenced the accused in accordance with the sentence agreement. In terms of the agreement, the accused was sentenced to a fine of R80 000.00 or 24 months' imprisonment on each of the 41 counts, being the maximum sentence provided for in the Income Tax Act read with the Adjustment of Fines Act 101 of 1991.The effective sentence, as confirmed in the agreement, is a fine of R3 280 000.00 or 984 months (82 years) imprisonment. The accused has, moreover, agreed to pay to the Criminal Assets Recovery Account ("CARA") the amount of R8.75 million as contemplated in section 64(e) of Act 121 of 1998. This payment will be effected within 30 days of the plea agreement having been finalised today. The plea and sentence agreement was entered into having due regard to the following factors, as stipulated in the agreement: 1.the State consulted with the complainants, being representatives of the South African Revenue Service ("SARS") and representatives of the South African Reserve Bank ("SARB"), and afforded them the opportunity to make representations; as required by the law. 2.the said complainants, namely SARS and SARB, are satisfied with the agreement as entered into 3.SARS has instituted various actions against the accused relevant to the offences and will (in terms of the actions and by agreement with the accused) recover an amount of R 706.7 million (figure verified by SARS) 4.the accused has reached an agreement with SARS and SARB to settle all disputes between them. In terms of the agreement with SARS, the accused has entered into an agreement to settle his tax indebtedness with SARS and has reached a settlement with SARB 5.the length of the trial should the accused plead not guilty, and the consequent burden on the criminal justice system 6.the trial related prejudice by virtue of material witnesses who have passed away or have become unavailable or unable to testify 7.the expense to which the State would be put by such a trial, which would be lengthy and require the testimony of experts and witnesses based in foreign countries 8.the nature, aggravating circumstances and facts relating to the offences 9.the personal circumstances of the accused 10.the fact that the accused has no previous convictions 11.the interests of society. Statement issued by Bulelwa Makeke, Executive Manager: Communications, National Prosecuting Authority, August 29 2013 http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71654?oid=401431&sn=Detail&pid=71616 The facts speak for themselves. Dave King is a convicted criminal. As Darther says, you cannot be convicted of a criminal offence for tax avoidance. Edited October 21, 2013 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 If SARS are happy and he's paid up in full, I would assume he avoided a criminal conviction - intuitively you can't evade tax by paying it. But it seems a very complex subject to me. From the reports it seems it was "pay up or go to jail", and by all accounts he paid up. Wrong. He was indeed convicted as the court record shows. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Does anyone ahve a copy of S.75 of the SA Income Tax Act? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Does anyone ahve a copy of S.75 of the SA Income Tax Act? http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/saf93024.pdf Have fun! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 So if D King didn't have the money he'd be doing porridge for the rest of his life? - That makes him a criminal in my eyes and I'm no yahoo. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted October 21, 2013 Author Share Posted October 21, 2013 So if D King didn't have the money he'd be doing porridge for the rest of his life? - That makes him a criminal in my eyes and I'm no yahoo. certainly one way of looking at it.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 So if D King didn't have the money he'd be doing porridge for the rest of his life? - That makes him a criminal in my eyes and I'm no yahoo. He's convicted any way you look at it; but yes (82 years) maybe he'd have got time off for good behaviour. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Wrong. He was indeed convicted as the court record shows. Never thought I was right in any way, just saying how it comes across to me. I'm happy to be corrected. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blinkyman 0 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 For what it is worth - I followed a discussion on this very subject on Twitter re Britney's comments on Kings 41 Criminal convictions, where a South African bear commented on the difference in their court system compared to Scotland/Britain. The suggestion was that it would have been delt with in civil court here not in criminal court. Also suggested that High Court/Criminal being the only level in SA. In theory would SDM have gone to jail IF he had lost in court to HMRC? Feel free to correct me here, not being a criminal myself, I'm not really experienced in court matters 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 As I said, the Yahoos and their media trolls will have a field day IF he joins up. Most likely only to their own amusement. RE: SDM ... I would assume his companies would have been shut down and liquidated and whatnot, but I doubt that he would have been sentenced that heavily himself. After all, he did not do this all on his own. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.