
Murderers of five-year-old Valentino Grootetjie sentenced to life in prison
Valentino Grootetjie would have turned 11 on 22 June 2025. But instead of planning a birthday party, his parents are organising a bittersweet memorial to their son, who was gunned down in 2019 while he was playing with his younger brother in the yard of their Lavender Hill home. He was five years old at the time.
More than five years later, after a trial lasting almost two months, and the ordeal his parents have endured each day in court, reliving and testifying to the horror of that day, Valentino's killers are finally facing the consequences of their crime.
On Tuesday, 17 June, the Western Cape Division of the High Court in Cape Town sentenced Carlo Hofmeester and Chadwin Isaacs to life imprisonment for Valentino's murder.
In addition, the court sentenced each to five years for contravening the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998, and a total of 90 years – 10 years per count – for the attempted murders of Wesley Kok, Olivia Stevens, Natasha Daniels, Leticia Barnes, Crystal Joseph, Derrick Strydom, Gershwin Baars, Brandon Coetzee and Dillon Wentzel.
They were also sentenced to five years each for two counts of illegal possession of firearms and illegal possession of ammunition. The sentences will run concurrently.
Before passing sentence, Judge Melanie Holderness stated that she had assessed 'all mitigating and aggravating factors' of the case. Both Hofmeester and Isaacs had been raised in an environment of historical dispossession and displacement, where drugs and crime prevail, and the lure of the street gang 'family' beckons loudly to youths desperate for a sense of belonging.
She acknowledged that they had been incarcerated for more than five years without bail, had finally admitted, prior to sentencing, to their involvement, and had apologised to the Grootetjie family, as well as the nine witnesses they were convicted of attempting to murder. But the aggravating circumstances far outweighed the factors in mitigation.
State Advocate Leon Snyman proved that the accused were members of the Fast Guns gang who were engaged in drug turf wars with the Mongrels Gang in Lavender Hill and surrounding areas.
Multiple shots
On 21 December 2019, in pursuit of a member of the Mongrels, both accused had consecutively fired multiple times into the yard of 37 Drury Lane, where Valentino was playing. In broad daylight and in plain sight, they had fatally shot the five-year-old in the back of his head, in 'an act of random and unfathomable violence', said Judge Holderness.
Hofmeester and Isaacs claimed they fired only once, but evidence showed at least six shots were fired by each accused. In sentencing, Judge Holderness agreed with the State that the accused did not show remorse, failed to take the court into their confidence and downplayed the seriousness of the offences, as they had appeared 'bored' during the trial.
There were therefore no substantial and compelling circumstances which allowed the court to deviate from the prescribed minimum sentence of life imprisonment. The court concluded they had refused to take responsibility or acknowledge the impact of their crimes.
They had further perjured themselves with the 'clear intention of misleading the court'. Their conduct had augmented the 'inconceivable anguish' of Valentino's parents at losing a child 'under such violent conditions'.
In their Victim Impact Statements, Valentino's parents, Patrick Kotze and Romana Grootetjie, both described the horror of witnessing their five-year-old son – the eldest of three – 'lying in a pool of blood'.
'We live in a violent ghetto,' reflected Valentino's father, Kotze. 'But our child was not even safe in his own home.'
During the sentencing, the small courtroom was filled with the families of both victims and perpetrators – in stark contrast to the empty courtroom Valentino's parents had attended daily during the trial.
Judge Holderness praised their dedication and Kotze's courageous testimony. She also commended Sergeant Siyasanga Mapukata for conducting an exemplary investigation into Valentino's murder.
Now that the sentence has been passed, Valentino's parents are desperate for healing. They plan to marry on Valentino's birthday – as a gesture of love and joy, amid their grief and loss.
It's what Valentino would have wanted, they say. But the residual trauma remains. After Valentino's murder, his father lost his job. The family is now destitute and Valentino's mother, Romana Grootetjie, suffers from severe post-traumatic stress.
'I am grateful that justice has been done and for the support we received from advocate [Leon] Snyman and Sergeant Mapukata,' she said after the sentencing. 'But the hole in our hearts will never heal. I cry for Valentino every day and I will cry for the rest of my life.' DM
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Maverick
6 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Bail granted to Gqeberha firearms dealer accused of selling guns to criminals
After facing murder, theft and firearms-related charges, Karen Webb walked free from the city's Magistrate's Court on Thursday under strict bail conditions, ending a drawn-out legal battle that began with her arrest in February 2024. After 18 months behind bars and multiple failed bail attempts, beleaguered Gqeberha firearms dealer Karen Webb walked out of the city's Magistrate's Court with an enormous smile on her face. Flanked by her parents and attorney, Webb took her first breath of free air since her arrest in February 2024 after she was granted bail on two separate cases on Thursday. 'Write a nice article about me,' she told journalists as she got behind the driver's seat of her parents' car and drove off. In addition to two murder charges, the 41-year-old faces 14 counts of theft, fraud and forgery, several charges related to the Firearms Control Act pertaining to the unauthorised transport of weapons, failure to report the loss or theft of weapons, unauthorised production of ammunition and providing firearms training while uncertified to do so, among other charges. The charges relate to allegations that Webb supplied firearms to criminal elements across the country, stole money and firearms from customers and provided uncertified firearms training. While she did not pull the trigger in the two murder charges against her, she is accused of providing the firearms to the violent criminals who committed the crimes. Shortly after Webb's arrest for alleged theft of firearms, her initial formal bail application was dismissed and a subsequent application based on new facts was also refused. A few months ago, she approached the Eastern Cape Division of the High Court in Makhanda to appeal against the decision and was granted bail in the amount of R10,000. However, several more charges had been brought against her, including the murder charges, meaning an entirely new bail application was undertaken. Webb was also charged with being in possession of contraband while in custody at the North End Prison after she was allegedly twice found in possession of a cellphone. She returned to court on Thursday for judgment in the bail application, which included the murder and firearms-related charges. In the judgment, Magistrate Maharaj found that the State did not present a strong enough case to prevent Webb's release from custody. She said while the charges against Webb were very serious, the State's reasons for opposing bail were not persuasive enough. Despite several pending cases against her, Maharaj said Webb had no previous convictions, and the fact that she had a minor daughter and elderly parents in the city was enough to prevent her from fleeing and evading her trial. She said there was also not enough proof before court that Webb might tamper with evidence, attempt to influence witnesses or disturb the public order. Strict conditions Maharaj set strict bail conditions – house arrest between 6pm and 6am, Webb must report to her local police station three times a week, and the investigating officers must be notified before any travel outside Gqeberha. Maharaj transferred the matter to another court where Magistrate Ralton Basterman presided over Webb's bail application related to the cellphones she allegedly smuggled into prison. Webb's attorney, Peter Daubermann, instructed by Louis van Rensburg, told the court he had been in contact with the acting director of public prosecutions, advocate Marius Stander, and made representations that his client should be released on warning. In his submissions, Daubermann said the cellphone charges were 'petty offences that paled in comparison to the other cases against her on which she was already granted bail'. After some back-and-forth between Daubermann and prosecutor Asavela Dweba, Stander contacted the State attorneys and instructed them that bail should not be opposed. Basterman subsequently granted Webb bail in the amount of R1,000 and said no additional bail conditions were required as the conditions of her other bail proceedings were adequate. Upon leaving the courthouse, Webb hugged Van Rensburg before helping her wheelchair-bound mother into their car and driving off. She is expected to return to court on 22 August, when a trial date could possibly be determined. During a previous bail application, it was revealed that more than 1,250 firearms that had allegedly been in her care were still missing. More than 100 firearms linked to Webb have already been recovered from crime scenes across the country. According to an affidavit read into the record by State advocate Liezel Landman on behalf of Detective Sergeant JJ Botha, the weapons disappeared before Webb's arrest in February 2024 and have not been recovered. DM


Eyewitness News
15 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act must be applied carefully to prevent abuse by criminals: Erasmus
CAPE TOWN - Western Cape High Court Judge Nathan Erasmus has cautioned that section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which allows witnesses to avoid prosecution in exchange for truthful testimony, must be applied carefully to prevent abuse by criminals. Delivering judgment in the Joshlin Smith matter on Wednesday, Erasmus warned that the provision should not become a tool for offenders to escape accountability, but rather a means to serve justice. ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith: NPA welcomes court's dismissal of kidnappers' bid to appeal convictions, sentences "It should not be used as a tool for people that commit criminal conduct to hide behind. Hence, the decision for the prosecution to use this tool and request the court to apply it must be considered carefully." State witness Lourentia Lombaard was granted immunity from prosecution on Tuesday after Erasmus ruled that her testimony played a key role in securing conviction for her co-accused in the matter.


Eyewitness News
a day ago
- Eyewitness News
MK Party takes battle against Cachalia to the High Court
JOHANNESBURG - After being shown the door by the Constitutional Court last month, the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party is taking its battle against the newly-appointed police Minister Firoz Cachalia to the High Court. It has filed an urgent case in the North Gauteng Division seeking to have Cachalia's appointment declared unconstitutional and invalid. The party is also challenging President Cyril Ramaphosa's decision to establish a commission of inquiry into alleged corruption, collusion and political interference within the police service. ALSO READ: Cachalia says he's not been given a timeline for his stint as acting police minister Similar to the case it lodged when it was denied direct access to the Constitutional Court, the MK Party is now asking the High Court to review the decisions taken by Ramaphosa when he decided to put Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave. It followed claims by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi that Mchunu was allegedly colluding with a criminal network that has infiltrated the South African Police Service (SAPS). On 1 August 2025, Cachalia was sworn into office to act in Mchunu's place, a move the MK Party also believes is unconstitutional. The party is now asking the High Court to consider these decisions, to find them illegal, invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution, and to set them aside. It's asked the court to enrol the matter for its first hearing on 26 August 2025.