43 romantic and a charming age old custom”. [75] Having considered the record of the trial in the court a quo, Nhlapo was of the view that ukuthwala was not properly performed in the matter. The young age of the complainant, her lack of consent and the fact that lobola was paid before the ukuthwala occurred indicated that it was in fact not a true instance of ukuthwala. He noted though that this was not a unique situation, as the Discussion Paper traversed several situations in which ukuthwala was abused to justify patently offensive behaviour such as rape, violence and similar criminal conduct under the guise of ukuthwala. [76] This “misapplied form” of the customary practice was also described by Inkosi Mahlangu as a perversion of the custom and “aberrant”, in which young women or girls are abducted – and usually subjected to violence, including sexual abuse and assault – to coerce them into submission. The aberrant form of ukuthwala often occurs with the agreement of the girl child’s parents and family, who are paid a fee – improperly described as “lobola” - for permission “to abduct their daughter.” Nhlapo noted that the parents and family of the girl in such circumstances are usually from poor socio-economic circumstances, trapped in the cycle of poverty, and that the money or cattle derived from the abduction of the girl child for the marriage is unfortunately often attractive.