17 (b) In consequence the sentencing court is generally free to apply the usual sentencing criteria in deciding on an appropriate sentence. (c) The offender under 18 though over 16 does not have to establish the existence of substantial and compelling circumstances because s51(3)(a) finds no application to him or her. (d) By contrast with the class of offender under 16, however, the statutory scheme requires that the sentencing court should take into account the fact that the legislature has ordinarily ordained the prescribed sentences for the offences in question. This operates as a weighting factor in the sentencing process. (e) It follows on this approach that where the provisions of s51(2) apply the regional court retains its competence to finalise the matter contrary to the conclusion in Makwetsja. [25] Returning to the facts of the present appeal: the evidence in mitigation reveals a childhood characterised by neglect, ill-discipline and ineffective parenting. The appellant was raised in an atmosphere of social and emotional deprivation. Alcohol and substance abuse were the order of the day and clashes with the law were commonplace at an early age, followed inevitably by admission to a place of safety and an industrial school. Two attempts at suicide followed. Little wonder then that Satanism and its ritualistic practices appeared attractive to his still impressionable, immature mind. The tale is woeful. It is of a child failed