CRW2601 EXAM PACK 2 for 2022 for students doing Criminal law

CRW2601 EXAM PACK 2 for 2022 for students doing Criminal law If X hires Z to murder Y and Z murders Y, Z is the indirect perpetrator. If X buys dagga for his own use and Y acts merely as interpreter to the transaction, Y can qualify as an accomplice. In Thebus 2003 (2) SACR 319 (CC) it was held that the only way in which a common purpose can be established is if there is proof of a prior agreement between two or more participants. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. Only statement (c) is correct. The liability of an accessory after the fact, and an accomplice, is accessory in character. Being an accessory after the fact completely overlaps with the crime known as defeating or obstructing the course of justice. A joiner-in is a person who actively associates herself with a common purpose to kill another, (Y), before the lethal wound is inflicted on Y. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. All of these statements are correct. In Davies 1956 (3) SA 52 (A) the court held that the commission of a “putative” crime is punishable as attempt. One reason that the law punishes anticipatory crimes can be found in the preventive theory of punishment. Attempt may be committed even where X’s actions amount to the mere preparation for a crime. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. None of these statements is correct. X and Z can be convicted of the crime of conspiracy only if there is proof that they were in direct communication with each other. X can be convicted of incitement even if there is no proof that X had persuaded Z to commit the crime. The crime of corruption is committed only if the person to whom the benefit is offered is a public official. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. None of these statements is correct. The crime of public violence can only be committed by a number of persons acting with a common purpose. In the crime of perjury at common law, X will not be guilty of this crime if he makes a false Contempt of court may be committed where the press publishes information relating to the merits of a case which does not form part of the evidence while the case is still in progress. In South African law, a putative crime is not punishable. A putative crime is a crime which exists, but which X believes not to exist. In Schoombie 1945 AD 541, the Appeal Court confirmed X’s conviction of (completed) arson on the basis that X’s act qualified as an act of execution or consummation. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. Only statement (c) is correct. None of these statements is correct. A common purpose of disturbing the public peace and order is required for the crime of public violence. It is not a requirement for the crime of defeating or obstructing the course of justice that a case must be pending. It is possible to convict a person of perjury at common law if, under oath and in the course of a legal proceeding, he speaks the truth while believing that he is telling a lie. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. Only a declaration that is made under oath can lead to a conviction of perjury. X can be convicted of contempt of court if he unlawfully and intentionally falsely pretends to be an officer of the court, like an advocate or attorney. A reporter may be convicted of contempt of court if a reasonable person in his position could foresee that the information which he publishes might deal with a pending case. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. In Williams 1980 (1) SA 60 (A) the court held that it is not possible to be an accomplice to murder. Attempted assault is possible. If X is charged with murder, but it cannot be proved that he had the necessary intention to murder, he will invariably be convicted of culpable homicide. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. In Van Zyl 1993 (1) SACR 338 (C) the court held that the offence of pointing of an arm is committed only if the arm is pointed directly at the particular person in such a way that, if it were discharged, the bullet would strike that person. A person below the age of 16 years may possess an arm without a licence with prior consent of the holder of a licence to possess such firearm. It is not possible to convict X of robbery unless the property was on the victim’s person. A person may only be convicted of the crime of murder if he/she committed the crime with his/her own hands or body. The existence of a common purpose between two or more participants can only be proved on the basis of an expressed or implied prior agreement to commit an If X, (a woman) ties Z (another woman) to a bed to make it possible for Y (a man) to rape Z, and Y in actual fact rapes Z, X may be convicted as a perpetrator of the Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. None of the statements is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. In Davies 1956 (3) SA 52 (A) the Appeal Court held that the commission of a socalled putative crime is nevertheless punishable as attempt. In order to be convicted of an attempt to commit a specific crime, negligence is a sufficient form of culpability. The act in the crime of conspiracy consists in the entering into an agreement to commit a crime or crimes. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. None of these statements is correct. X ought to be convicted of incitement even if there is proof that the crime that he incited Y to commit, has indeed been committed. The crime of common-law perjury can only be committed if the particular statement is made orally. In statutory perjury the declaration must be made in the course of a legal proceeding. None of these statements is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statement (a) is correct. If X persuades Y, a witness in a trial, to give false evidence in court, X may be convicted of the crime of defeating or obstructing the course of justice. Laying a false criminal charge at the police against another person does not constitute the crime of defeating or obstructing the course of justice (or an attempt to commit it). Contempt of court in facie curiae is punished solely to protect the dignity of the individual judicial officer who presides in the case. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statement (a) is correct. All the statements are correct. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. X cannot be convicted of the offence of corruption created in section 3 of the Prevention and Combatting of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004 if he/she had merely agreed to accept gratification unlawfully in the future. If X is charged with corruption in terms of the abovementioned provision (Section 3 of Act 12 of 2004) and it appears at the trial that X had given gratification to Y in the belief that Y will give him a passport, but that Y is in actual fact not entitled to issue passports, this fact affords X a defence. A person used as a police trap does not act unlawfully if he/she agrees to receive gratification from another person in order to trap that person into committing the crime of corruption. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. None of these statements is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. All these statements are correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. Where an editor of a newspaper is charged with contempt of court on the ground of having published information in his newspaper concerning a pending case which tends to influence the outcome of the case, it is sufficient if the state proves culpability in the form of negligence. Unfair criticism of the South African Police Services by a newspaper reporter may amount to contempt of court. The reason for the existence of the crime of contempt of court is to protect the dignity of an individual. Only statement (b) is correct. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. None of these statements is correct. The crime of extortion can only be committed by a public official. The benefit in extortion is limited to patrimonial benefit. The crime of extortion is completed the moment X intentionally exerts pressure on Y to hand over a benefit to him, irrespective of whether X has received the benefit or not. Only statement (c) is correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statement (b) is correct. None of these statements is correct. If X obtains drugs for her own personal use, she cannot be convicted of the crime known as “dealing in drugs”. Culpability in the form of intention is required for the offence of “dealing in drugs”. Corruption in its active form is completed only once X has given a benefit to another. Only statement (a) is correct. Only statements (a) and (b) are correct. All of these statements are correct. Only statements (a) and (c) are correct. Only statements (b) and (c) are correct. A husband may not be convicted of raping his wife. If X , a twenty-two-year-old male, exposes himself indecently in front of a 13-year-old schoolgirl he may be convicted of a contravention of section 14 of the Sexual Offences Act 23 of 1957. The crime of common-law abduction can only be committed by a male person.