CRW2601 EXAM
STUDY UNIT 1
Let’s apply this simple principle to a concrete set of facts: Assume X is charged with having assaulted
Y. The evidence
... [Show More] relied upon by the prosecution to prove the charge reveals that one night while X was
walking in his sleep, he trampled upon Y, who happened to be sleeping on the fl oor. Has X committed
assault?
STUDY UNIT 2
Assume the South African parliament passes a statute in 2004, which contains the following provision:
“Any person who commits an act which could possibly be prejudicial to sound relations between
people, is guilty of a crime. This provision is deemed to have come into operation on 1 January 1995.”
No punishment is specified for the crime. Do you think that this provision complies with the principle of
legality?
STUDY UNIT 3
1. X, a 62-year-old man, works in a mine. His job is to operate the cocopans. These cocopans are used
to transport hard rocks and gravel from the bottom of the mine to the surface. One day, while working,
he suddenly experiences a blackout. In his state of unconsciousness, he falls on the lever that controls
the movement of the cocopans. A cocopan crashes into another worker, Y. Y is killed instantly. X is
charged with culpable homicide. The evidence before the court is as follows: X has been suffering from
diabetes for the past year. His doctor had warned him that he may lose consciousness at any time if he
fails to take his medication as instructed. On that particular day, X had failed to take his medication.
The court finds that X had insufficient grounds for assuming that he would not suffer a 35 blackout on
that particular day. X’s legal representative argues that X cannot be convicted of culpable homicide
because, at the time of the commission of the offence, he was not performing a voluntary act. In other
words, the defence raised is that of automatism. You are the state prosecutor. What would your
response be to this argument?
STUDY UNITS 4
In each of the following sets of facts, consider whether X’s act is the cause of Y’s death:
(a) Y feels depressed and threatens to commit suicide. X, who harbours a grudge against Y, hands her
a loaded fi rearm, stating that she may shoot and kill herself if she so wishes. Y takes the fi rearm and
shoots and kills herself.
(b) X, who is very poor, reads a newspaper report about a man who had been caught by a crocodile in
a river in Botswana. She persuades her uncle Y, who is very rich and whose heir she is, to go on a
safari to Botswana. She also encourages her uncle to take a boat trip on the river, hoping that he will be
killed by a crocodile. Y undertakes the safari. He also goes out on a canoe on the river. The canoe is
unexpectedly overturned by a hippo. Y falls into the water. A crocodile catches and kills him.
(c) X tries to stab Y, intending to murder her. Y ducks and receives only a minor cut on the arm.
However, infection sets in and Y visits a doctor. The doctor gives her an injection and tells her to come
back the following week for two more injections. The doctor warns Y that she may die if she fails to
come back for the other two injections. Y fails to go back to the doctor, reasoning that her body is
strong enough to fight the infection. She dies as a result of the infection.
(d) X shoots Y in the chest, intending to murder her. The bullet wound is of such a serious nature that Y
will die if she does not receive medical treatment. Y is admitted to hospital, but because the nursing
staff is on a general strike, she receives inadequate medical treatment. The wound becomes infected.
Although she is eventually treated for the infection, she dies after a period of two weeks
STUDY UNIT 5
Assume that X, who is sleeping in his home, is woken up in the middle of the night by Y, an armed
burglar, who approaches his room or that of a family member. X shoots at Y in order to protect his
family. Y dies as a result of the shot. Can X’s conduct be justified on the grounds of private defence
STUDY UNIT 6
While walking in the street, X sees a dog attacking Y, an old person. X and Y do not know each other.
In order to protect Y, who cannot defend herself, X hits the dog with her walking stick. The dog dies as
a result of a head wound caused by the injuries infl icted by X. X is charged with malicious injury to
property in respect of the dog. What is the appropriate defence in these circumstances – private
defence or necessity?
STUDY UNIT 7
(1) Define, in a maximum of two sentences, the meaning of “culpability” (as an element of criminal
liability).
(2) Complete the following statement: Culpability = ................................................... plus either
................................... or ......................................
(3) The principle of contemporaneity in criminal law means the following: If the unlawful act is
committed at a certain time without any ............................, and the culpability is present at a later time
without there being an ............................... act at the same time, no crime is committed.
(4) Define the concept of criminal capacity.
(5) Explain the difference between the concepts of “criminal capacity” and “intention”.
(6) Name and explain the two psychological components, or “legs”, of the test for criminal capacity.
(7) Name three defences excluding criminal capacity.
(8) What was the meaning of the concept of non-pathological criminal incapacity before 2002?
(9) Discuss the decision in Eadie, especially the question whether the defence of non-pathological
criminal incapacity still exists after this judgment
STUDY UNIT 8
X, a 13-year-old girl, has no home. Every day, she stands on a corner of a street next to the robot,
begging for money. Her 18-year-old friend, Y, tells her that she is wasting her time; she should rather
resort to crime. Y also tells her that she can come and stay at her home if she would be prepared to rob
the drivers of motorcars of their cell-phones. X decides that she has had enough of begging. The next
day, she smashes a car window at the robot and grabs the car-owner’s cell-phone. She is caught and
charged with robbery. Critically evaluate X’s chances of succeeding with the defence that she lacked
criminal capacity at the time of the commission of the offence.
STUDY UNIT 9
(1) Define intention.
(2) Name the two elements of intention and explain briefly what each entails.
(3) Name the three forms of intention.
(4) Define each of the three forms of intention and illustrate each by means of an example.
(5) Explain the two components of intention in the form of dolus eventualis in terms of the Humphreys
decision. (6) Why is it said that the test for intention is subjective? Explain briefly.
(7) Discuss the following statement: “Intention must be directed at all the requirements of the offence.”
(8) Distinguish between intention and motive. Is X’s motive relevant where it has to be ascertained
whether he had intention?
STUDY 9
A thief plans to rob a café owner. She takes a fi rearm with her, and although she sincerely hopes that
there will be no resistance, she does foresee a reasonable possibility that she will have to shoot at her
victim and, in so doing, could cause the latter’s death. Hoping that the owner of the café would readily
hand over the money, she keeps the weapon in her jacket pocket when she confronts her and
demands money. At that moment her feet slip from under her and she falls to the floor. The loaded
weapon goes off. Contrary to all expectations, the café owner is fatally wounded. X is charged with
murder. Do you think that she can succeed with a defence of mistake regarding the causal chain of
events?
STUDY UNIT 11
(1) Define the test for negligence.
(2) Discuss the concept of the reasonable person.
(3) Discuss the fi rst leg of the test for negligence, that is, the question whether the reasonable person
would have foreseen the possibility that the particular result might ensue or the particular circumstance
might exist.
(4) Discuss the second leg of the test for negligence, that is, the question whether the reasonable
person would have taken steps to guard against the possibility of the result ensuing.
(5) How does the test for negligence in formally defined crimes differ from the test for negligence in
materially defined crimes?
(6) What is the abbreviated way in which we may refer to negligence?
(7) Name the subjective factors that may be taken into consideration in determining negligence, and
give an example of each factor.
(8) (a) When can X be convicted of murder if he killed his attacker in a situation in which he exceeded
the bounds of private defence? Discuss. (b) When can X be convicted of culpable homicide if he
killed his attacker in a situation in which he exceeded the bounds of private defence? Discuss.
STUDY UNIT 12
X and Z visit a bar and consume a number of drinks. Upon leaving the bar, pedestrian Y accidentally
bumps against X, who by this stage is swaying on the sidewalk. A fi ght ensues. X holds onto Y from
behind and Z kills Y by stabbing her with a knife. X and Z are charged with the murder of Y. The court
finds that X and Z have caused Y’s death unlawfully, but that X was so intoxicated during the fi ght that
she was unable to distinguish between right and wrong. The court further finds that at the time of the
assault upon Y, Z was able to act and that she had criminal capacity, but that she was so intoxicated
that she lacked the intention to murder Y. X and Z rely on the defence of intoxication. Discuss critically
whether X and Z ought to succeed with this defence
STUDY UNIT 13
(1) Explain the meaning of the term “strict liability”.
(2) Explain the meaning of vicarious liability.
(3) Distinguish between a natural person and a corporate body, and name a few examples of the latter
category.
(4) Fill in the missing words: Section 332(1) provides that an act by a director or servant of a corporate
body is deemed to be the act of the corporate body itself, provided the act was performed by such a
person ... or in the ... as a director or servant, or if the director or servant was ... or ... the interests of
the corporate body.
(5) Can a corporate body be guilty only of a statutory crime?
(6) State in one paragraph why the current South African model of corporate criminal liability is
criticised.
STUDY UNIT 14
X1, X2 and X3 are members of a criminal gang. Their main activities are to steal motor vehicles at
shopping centres. X1, the leader, is not involved in the actual stealing of cars. He only tells X2 and X3
what to do. X2 and X3 always carry fi rearms and knives with them when they engage in their criminal
activities. Because of the dangerous nature of their activities, all the members of the gang realise that
somebody may get killed. In fact, the gang leader (X1) has instructed them to kill anyone who interferes
with their activities. One evening, while X2 and X3 are attempting to steal a car parked in an
underground parking garage, Y, the owner of the car, arrives at the scene. Upon seeing the robbers,
she screams for help, but X2 and X3 force her into the boot of her car. They drive 20 kilometres out of
the city to a desolate area in the bush. X2 rapes Y and then cuts Y’s throat. During all these events, X3
holds Y down. They (X2 and X3) then leave the scene of the crime. Y, who is mortally wounded,
screams for help. X4, a passerby, hears her screams. X4 is not a member of the gang. He has never
even met any of the members of the gang. He also rapes Y and, intending to kill her, hits her with a
stick over the head. Fifteen minutes after being raped and assaulted by X4, Y dies. The autopsy report
reveals that Y died as a result of blood loss incurred by the throat-cutting. In the report, it is also stated
that the head injury did not hasten her death. You are the state prosecutor. Explain which crimes (if
any) X1, X2, X3 and X4 have committed and the legal grounds upon which the liability of each will be
based. [Show Less]