LEV3701 Assignment 1 (ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED

Well-structured LEV3701 Assignment 1 (ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED. (DETAILED ANSWERS - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED!).... QUESTION 1 Consider the following statements about the compellability of spouses to testify and choose the correct option 1. Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 has, to some extent, been amended by section 68 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007. Subsection 195(1)(a) now excludes a child that is merely in the care of the wife or the husband. 2. In terms of section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, the spouse of an accused is a competent as well as a compellable witness in defence of that accused, but only when such an accused is jointly charged with someone else 3. Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 is applicable not only to people who are married when testifying is at stake, but also to people who were married when the relevant crime was committed, even though the marriage has been dissolved in the meantime 4. If the accused is jointly charged with someone else, the spouse of such an accused will be competent and compellable to give evidence on behalf of that co-accused. QUESTION 2 A crowd of people that are attending a rock concert are attacked and robbed of their wallets and jewelry. X, Y and Z, members of the audience, capture footage of the criminals on a camera (non-digital), a video-camera (non-digital) and a cellular-phone respectively. The robbers are caught and charged with robbery. Consider the following statements about the trial evidence and choose the correct option: 1. The photograph taken by X can be regarded as documentary evidence because it is used to represent something that is the subject matter of the court case. 2. According to S v Mpumlo 1986 (3) SA 485 (E) and S v Baleka (1) 1986 (4) SA 192 (T) the videotape footage by Y can be classified as documentary evidence. 3. The data message captured on Z’s cellular phone depicting the robbery is inadmissible and carries no evidential weight. 4. According to S v Singh 1975 (1) SA 330 (N) and S v Ramgobin 1986 (4) SA 117 (N) the videotape footage by Y can be classified as real evidence. UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 1 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements about the compellability of spouses to testify and choose the correct option: 1. Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 has, to some extent, been amended by section 68 of theCriminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007. Subsection 195(1)(a) nowexcludes a child that is merely in the care of the wife or the husband. 2. In terms of section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, the spouse of an accused is a competent as wellas a compellable witness in defence of that accused, but only when such an accused is jointly charged withsomeone else. 3. Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 is applicable not only to people who are married whentestifying is at stake, but also to people who were married when the relevant crime was committed, even though themarriage has been dissolved in the meantime. 4. If the accused is jointly charged with someone else, the spouse of such an accused will be competent andcompellable to give evidence on behalf of that co-accused. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 2 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ A crowd of people that are attending a rock concert are attacked and robbed of their wallets and jewelry. X, Y and Z, membersof the audience, capture footage of the criminals on a camera (non-digital), a video-camera (non-digital) and a cellular-phonerespectively. The robbers are caught and charged with robbery. Consider the following statements about the trial evidenceand choose the correct option: 1. The photograph taken by X can be regarded as documentary evidence because it is used to represent somethingthat is the subject matter of the court case. 2. According to S v Mpumlo 1986 (3) SA 485 (E) and S v Baleka (1) 1986 (4) SA 192 (T) the videotape footage by Y canbe classifi ed as documentary evidence. 3. The data message captured on Z’s cellular phone depicting the robbery is inadmissible and carries no evidentialweight. 4. According to S v Singh 1975 (1) SA 330 (N) and S v Ramgobin 1986 (4) SA 117 (N) the videotape footage by Y can beclassifi ed as real evidence. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 3 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Microfi lm is readable with the naked eye and is usually submitted for its subject-content. It is therefore treated asdocumentary evidence. 2. The subject of a theft case is an historical photograph that was stolen from a museum. The photograph will betreated as documentary evidence. 3. A person is charged with the unlawful possession of pornographic photographs. The court will treat the photographsas real evidence. 4. “Offi cial documents” is another term for public documents that are kept under the supervision or control of theDirector of Public Prosecutions. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 4 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ The evidential value of a piece of evidence is important … 1. only when determining the admissibility of that evidence. 2. only during the evaluation of that evidence. 3. both during the evaluation of that evidence and when determining its admissibility. 4. when that evidence is evidence about a previous consistent statement. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 5 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. There is no need to authenticate a document if the document originates from a common-law country. 2. Photographs may sometimes constitute documentary evidence, particularly if the physical photograph itself iscentral to the case (for example where it has fi ngerprints on its surface). 3. There is no need to authenticate a document if the opposing party has discovered such a document. 4. In common law, public documents are admissible to prove the truth of what they contain. This means that thesedocuments are treated as an exception to the rule against the admissibility of previous consistent statements. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 6 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. The word “document” is a very wide term but cannot also include computer printouts. 2. During the process of discovery, a declarant must list all possibly relevant documents except those that he lawfullymay refuse to discover, or which are no longer in his possession. 3. Evidence derived from pocket calculators is free from human intervention and is therefore documentary evidence. 4. If the content of a document must be proved, secondary evidence will sometimes be accepted, but it must always bein written form. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 7 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. The Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 can be described as a historical source of the South African law of evidence. 2. If the current South African law does not provide a solution to an evidentiary problem, our courts will fi rst of allsearch for a solution in the early Roman-Dutch law. 3. Criminal law and criminal procedural law form part of the substantive law, whereas the law of evidence forms part ofthe procedural law. 4. The “facts in dispute” in a particular case are heavily infl uenced by the applicable substantive law. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 8 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Identify the correct statement from the options below: Section 35(3) of the Constitution provides that every accused personshall have the right to a fair trial, which includes the right … 1. to have a legal practitioner assigned to him or her by the state and at state expense, if substantial injustice wouldotherwise result, and to be informed of this right promptly. 2. to adduce and challenge evidence and not to be a compellable witness against himself or herself. 3. to be informed, in an understandable language, that he or she has the right to remain silent, and about theconsequences of making a statement. 4. to choose, and to consult with a legal practitioner, and to be informed of this right promptly. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 9 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements about real evidence, and choose the correct option: 1. Real evidence refers to a physical object or thing, which is brought before the court for the court to view it for itself.Examples of real evidence could include a knife, a fi ngerprint or even a person. 2. According to S v Shabalala 1986 (4) SA 734 (A) evidence about a footprint must be analysed and presented in courtby an expert. 3. A witness’s behaviour in court can be described as real evidence concerning the credibility of that witness and is ofparticular importance when the case is before a court of appeal. 4. In S v Mavundla 1976 (2) SA 162 (N) the physical appearance of an accused served as real evidence about hisgender. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 10 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements about previous consistent statements and choose the correct statement: 1. Evidence of a complaint in a sexual case is exceptionally admitted as a matter relating to the complainant’scredibility and is, therefore, corroborative evidence. 2. A previous consistent statement is a statement which is similar to a statement made by someone on a previousoccasion in court. 3. A previous consistent statement is normally made by an accused during police custody. 4. There is question of a previous consistent statement when a witness repeats a consistent statement made byanother witness on a previous occasion, which serves as self-corroboration for the other witness. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 11 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ During a civil matter, the plaintiff wants to present the record of the court’s fi nding in a criminal trial as evidence in the civilmatter that is based on the same facts. The evidence will be … 1. inadmissible opinion evidence. 2. hearsay evidence. 3. evidence about a previous consistent statement. 4. similar fact evidence. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 12 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ As far as documentary evidence is concerned, a copy of a person's identity document can best be described as ... 1. secondary evidence. 2. primary evidence. 3. indirect evidence. 4. hearsay evidence. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 13 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ A bank is robbed and afterwards the police fi nd certain metal boxes containing money in a ditch. The boxes are identifi ed asthose that were taken from the bank. A few days later the accused is taken into custody. He confesses that he took part inthe robbery, but the confession does not comply with the requirements for admissibility in terms of section 217 of theCriminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. Subsequent upon his confession, the accused takes the police to the ditch where thecontainers were found and says to them that this is the place where the money was hidden. Consider the followingstatements and choose the correct option: 1. Because the accused followed up the inadmissible confession with a pointing out of the place where the containershad been left, the inadmissible confession now becomes admissible. 2. Section 35(5) of the Constitution of 1996 is irrelevant in this situation. 3. Because the pointing out forms part of the inadmissible confession, it can never be admissible evidence. 4. The pointing out of the containers amounts to an admission and will be admissible if there was no coercion on thepart of the police. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 14 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements about opinion evidence and choose the correct option: 1. When an expert refers to textbooks while testifying in court, he must not merely convey the author’s opinion to thecourt since that will constitute inadmissible evidence of previous consistent statements. 2. A lay person may express an opinion on whether the driver of a motor vehicle was under the infl uence of alcohol. 3. A lay person's opinion about the approximate speed at which a vehicle was travelling is inadmissible evidence. 4. A lay person's opinion about the identity of the author of a specifi c handwriting is inadmissible evidence. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 15 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements about hearsay evidence and choose the correct option: 1. If a witness in a criminal case tells the court that something was admitted or confessed by a non-testifying accused,such evidence will be treated as hearsay evidence by the court. 2. If the court classifi es certain evidence as hearsay, such evidence will no longer be hearsay if the person upon whosecredibility the probative value of the evidence depends, later testifi es during the proceedings. 3. Hearsay evidence consists of oral evidence about that which a witness previously heard and wants to testify about incourt. Hearsay evidence can therefore never be in a written form. 4. If a witness in a civil matter tells the court that something was admitted by someone else, such evidence is, strictlyspeaking, hearsay evidence. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 16 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. If a witness gives unfavourable evidence, the party who called such a witness may present evidence whichcontradicts the witness. 2. Examination-in-chief is conducted by the presiding offi cer in his capacity as “chief” of the court. 3. Questions about the accused’s previous convictions or bad character may, as a rule, be asked during cross-examination to attack the credibility of the accused. 4. The party who undertakes examination-in-chief can cross-examine an unfavourable witness. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 17 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ A copy of a typed contract stands to be admitted in court. The contract will ... 1. constitute documentary evidence where it is admitted to establish the terms of the contract. 2. constitute documentary evidence where it is admitted for the purpose of proving the existence of the writtencontract in circumstances where one of the parties denies that a written contract was ever created. 3. constitute circumstantial evidence where it is admitted for the purpose of proving the existence of the writtencontract in circumstances where one of the parties denies that a written contract was ever created. 4. constitute real evidence where it is admitted to establish the terms of the contract. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 18 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ G, a well-known personality, is found dead in her house. Fingerprints, footprints and a letter threatening her life are found inher house. Her recently estranged boyfriend, B, is arrested and charged with murder. Consider the following statements andchoose the correct option: 1. When fi ngerprints are used, an enlargement of the accused's fi ngerprint is compared in court with that of afi ngerprint found on the scene of the crime. If seven points of similarity are found, this will usually amount to proofupon a preponderance of probabilities that the same person has made the two sets of prints. 2. The court may look at B’s age, gender, race or observe his performance as a witness and this will be considered ascircumstantial evidence. 3. A comparison of B’s handwriting and that found in the letter will be done by an expert and the court is not allowed tohear lay evidence in this regard or draw its own conclusions. 4. Expert evidence is not required about the footprints and the court may draw its own conclusions when comparing B’sfootprints with those found at the scene. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 19 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. A subpoena duces tecum is usually used in both civil- and criminal matters to force the accused to reveal certaindocuments. 2. The following are all examples of documentary evidence: photographs, wills, books and drawings. 3. Section 233 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 allows for the admissibility of certifi ed copies of publicdocuments in civil proceedings under certain conditions. 4. A title deed and a baptismal certifi cate are examples of public documents. Clear my choice UNISA  2024  LEV3701-24-S2  Welcome Message  Assessment 1 Question 20 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 QUIZ Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Roman-Dutch law is the common law of South Africa and therefore constitutes the historical source of ourprocedural law. 2. In terms of section 35(1) of the Constitution, every accused person has the right to adduce and challenge evidence. 3. Section 206 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 is a residuary section, because it provides that the lawpertaining to the competency, compellability or privilege of witnesses which was in force in criminal proceedings on30 May 1961, shall apply in any case not expressly provided for. 4. The law of evidence is part of the substantive law, since the substantive law determines what elements must beproved in court before someone will be guilty of a crime. Clear my choice Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 1 Consider the following statements about the relevance and admissibility of evidence and choose the correct statement: 1. Facts relevant to the facts in issue may become in issue themselves. An example would be the reliability of a witness. 2. A finding by a court that a piece of evidence is inadmissible due to irrelevance is final and cannot be reconsidered during the same trial. 3. During a trial, the court must first consider the competency of a witness, then the admissibility of evidence, and finally the weight or persuasive value of evidence. The “weight” of evidence therefore plays no part when the court considers the admissibility of that evidence. 4. Irrelevant evidence will never be admissible, but relevant evidence will always be admissible. This statement is correct because facts relevant to the facts in issue may become in issue themselves, such as the reliability of a witness. The relevance of evidence is crucial for its admissibility, and the court must consider the relevance of evidence before admitting it. The court may need to consider the reliability of a witness in order to determine the admissibility of their testimony. Therefore, the statement accurately reflects the importance of considering the relevance of evidence in determining its admissibility. QUESTION 2 X and Y are accused of removing Y's son from the custody of Y's estranged wife (W) and kidnapping him to an unknown destination. W was an eyewitness to the kidnapping. Consider the following statements, and choose the correct option 1. X can compel Y to testify in defence of X. 2. Y can compel W to testify on his behalf. 3. Y can compel X to testify in defence of Y. 4. X can compel W to testify on his behalf Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 3 In the case of an alleged offence of a sexual nature, evidence of a previous consistent statement will inter alia be admissible if the complaint was made ... 1. At the first reasonable opportunity, but not later than 48 hours after the offence was committed. 2. At the first reasonable opportunity, but not later than 24 hours after the offence was committed. 3. At the first reasonable opportunity, and this could be weeks later, depending on the circumstances of each individual case. 4. At the first reasonable opportunity, but not later than 12 hours after the offence was committed. In the case of an alleged offence of a sexual nature, evidence of a previous consistent statement will be admissible if the complaint was made at the first reasonable opportunity, and this could be weeks later, depending on the circumstances of each individual case. This allows for the recognition that victims of sexual offences may not immediately feel comfortable or able to make a complaint, and it takes into account the significant psychological impact that sexual offences can have on the victim. It also recognizes that the time frame for reporting a sexual offence can vary greatly depending on the individual circumstances of each case. QUESTION 4 In S v Ndiki and Others [2007] 2 All SA 185 (Ck) it is explained that if a computer print-out contains a statement of which a person has knowledge and which is stored in the computer's memory, its use in evidence depends upon the credibility of an identifiable person. It would therefore constitute — 1. real evidence. 2. evidence of uncertain classification. 3. hearsay evidence. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 4. documentary evidence. The use of a computer print-out in evidence, containing a statement of which a person has knowledge and stored in the computer's memory, would constitute hearsay evidence. This is because the statement is being offered by someone other than the person who has knowledge of the statement, and its use in evidence depends upon the credibility of an identifiable person. As such, it falls under the category of hearsay evidence, which is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. QUESTION 5 Consider the following statements about admissions and confessions and choose the correct option: 1. If the content of a statement does not express ADMIT all the elements of an offence, but does so by necessary implication, then the statement amounts to a confession. 2. A statement made to a friend (who is not also a peace officer), will in principle be a confession, if the statement was freely and voluntarily made, while the declarant was in his sound and sober senses and without being unduly influenced thereto. 3. A statement that contains the words “made without prejudice” can never be disclosed. 4. Since an admission amounts to a statement adverse to the person making it, no person can ever make an “admission” which will be held against another person. The correct statement is: 1. If the content of a statement does not expressly admit all the elements of an offense, but does so by necessary implication, then the statement amounts to a confession. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. The reason for this is that a confession does not have to explicitly admit to all the elements of an offense, but can do so by necessary implication. Admissions, on the other hand, are statements adverse to the person making them, while confessions are statements that admit to all the elements of an offense. Statement 2 is incorrect because a statement made to a friend (who is not a peace officer) may be considered an admission, not necessarily a confession. Statement 3 is incorrect because a statement containing the words “made without prejudice” can be disclosed under certain circumstances, such as in civil litigation. Statement 4 is incorrect because a person can make an admission that may be held against another person. Admissions are statements that are adverse to the person making them and can be used as evidence against others in certain situations. QUESTION 6 A robbery is committed at a house in Sunnyside, Pretoria. A suspect, D, who matches the general description of a person seen in the vicinity of the house is arrested. A fingerprint and a footprint are found at the scene and compared to those taken from D. Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Footprints will usually constitute direct evidence. 2. The two sets of fingerprints will be enlarged and compared, and if seven points of similarity are found, this will usually amount to proof upon a preponderance of probabilities that the same person made both prints. 3. Footprints require an explanation by an expert and the court is obliged to accept the expert's opinion as to the identity of footprints. 4. Fingerprints may constitute real or circumstantial evidence. While footprints may require an explanation by an expert and the court is obliged to accept the expert's opinion as to the identity of footprints, fingerprints may constitute real or circumstantial evidence. This is because fingerprints are unique to each individual and can be directly linked to a specific person. Therefore, if a fingerprint Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. found at the scene matches the fingerprint of the suspect, it can be considered as direct evidence of their presence at the scene of the crime. On the other hand, the comparison of two sets of fingerprints and the finding of seven points of similarity does not necessarily amount to proof upon a preponderance of probabilities, as there could still be a small chance of error in the comparison. QUESTION 7 Consider the following statements about hearsay evidence and choose the correct option: 1. If all the parties to an issue agree to the admission of hearsay evidence, that evidence will no longer be hearsay and consequently becomes admissible. 2. Although a court has a discretion to allow hearsay evidence, this discretion will more readily be exercised in criminal- than in civil matters. 3. The court's approach in McDonald's Corp v Joburgers Drive-Inn Restaurant 1997 (1) SA 1 (A) provides a good example of how the common law hearsay-exceptions should today be handled. 4. The main reason for the inadmissibility of hearsay is that the witness who gives the hearsay evidence cannot guarantee its reliability QUESTION 8 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. An unfavourable witness is someone who testifies with the intention to prejudice the case of the party who called him. 2. A witness who wishes to rely on privilege, such as the privilege against self-incrimination, may refuse to enter the witness box. 3. In civil proceedings, the spouse of a party is always a competent and compellable witness for and against the party concerned. 4. The law relating to the competence and compellability to testify is controlled by a residuary clause in the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 9 Mr A and Mr B are jointly charged with the murder of Mr A's brother, C. Mr A and Mr B are married to Mrs A and Mrs B respectively. Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Mrs A can be compelled to testify in defence of Mr B. 2. Mrs A can be compelled to testify against Mr A. 3. Mr B is competent to testify in defence of Mr A. 4. Mrs B can be compelled to testify against Mr B. Mr B is competent to testify in defence of Mr A - This statement is correct. Mr B is competent to testify in defence of Mr A as he is not directly involved in the charges and is not being asked to testify against his own spouse. QUESTION 10 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. The law of evidence is part of the substantive law, since the substantive law determines what elements must be proved in court before someone will be guilty of a crime. 2. Roman-Dutch law is the common law of South Africa and therefore constitutes the historical source of our procedural law. 3. .Section 206 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 is a residuary section, because it provides that the law pertaining to the competency, compellability or privilege of witnesses which was in force in criminal proceedings on 30 May 1961, shall apply in any case not expressly provided for. 4. In terms of section 35(1) of the Constitution, every accused person has the right to adduce and challenge evidence. Option 1 is incorrect because the law of evidence is actually part of procedural law, not substantive law. Substantive law deals with the substance of the law and defines the rights and duties of individuals, while procedural law deals with the processes and procedures followed in court. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. Option 2 is incorrect because Roman-Dutch law is actually the historical source of substantive law in South Africa, not procedural law. Option 3 is incorrect because Section 206 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 is a transitional provision, not a residuary section. It deals with the application of the law pertaining to the competency, compellability or privilege of witnesses that was in force in criminal proceedings before a certain date. QUESTION 11 Consider the following statements about opinion evidence and choose the correct option: 1. The court in Hollinv gHtewtohonrn [1943] 2 All ER 35 decided that the finding on an issue in a civil trial cannot serve as proof of that issue in an ensuing criminal trial, since the onus of proof in criminal matters is higher than in civil matters. 2. Because of the complicated nature of civil proceedings, parties must give notice of any intention to rely on expert evidence, but in criminal cases the prosecution is not required to disclose expert evidence before the trial starts. 3. When an expert refers to textbooks while testifying in court, he must not merely convey the author's opinion to the court, since this will constitute hearsay evidence. 4. Opinion evidence is generally inadmissible because it amounts to evidence of previous consistent statements. QUESTION 12 Consider the following statements about previous consistent statements and choose the correct option: 1. There is question of a previous consistent statement when, during testimony in court, a witness repeats a statement consistent with one made on a previous occasion to corroborate his evidence Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 2. The rule against the admissibility of evidence about a previous consistent statement is actually a rule against the admissibility of similar fact evidence. 3. Section 59 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 determines that, in criminal proceedings involving the alleged commission of a sexual offence, the court must draw a negative inference from the long delay between the alleged commission of such offence and the reporting thereof. 4. If itis suggested or alleged (mostly during cross-examination) that the witness has recently fabricated a part of his evidence, evidence may be led to show that the same thing was said at an earlier opportunity. This evidence is only tendered to show that he did not recently fabricate the evidence to support his credibility. The evidence is therefore relevant for this purpose (to support the witness's credibility), and essentially corroborates the witness's evidence. Option 1 is the correct statement. This is because a previous consistent statement is used to support a witness's credibility and the reliability of their testimony. It is a permissible form of corroborative evidence. The other options do not accurately describe the concept of a previous consistent statement or its admissibility in court. QUESTION 13 Consider the following statements about real evidence and choose the correct option: 1. When the court adjourns to accompany the parties to an inspection of the scene of an incident or crime, what is found at the scene is considered real evidence. 2. The behaviour of an accused in court will sometimes constitute circumstantial evidence. 3. An expert is often called to explain an object or its operation. In such a case, the expert's evidence will constitute real evidence, 4. The testimony of an eyewitness in a murder trial that he saw the suspect running from a house with a bloody knife in his hand, and that upon further Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. investigation, he found the victim fatally stabbed inside the house, is real, direct evidence. QUESTION 14 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Discovery entails a written affidavit listing all possibly relevant documents in the possession of the declarant party or his lawyer. This procedure is used in both criminal and civil cases. 2. When a document has been authenticated in its country of origin, it is unnecessary to prove the authenticity of such a document in a South African court. 3. In criminal proceedings, an original official document may only be produced upon an order by a Director of Public Prosecutions. 4. In Sv Ndiki and Others [2007] 2 All SA 185 (Ck) it is explained that if a computer print-out contains a statement of which a person has knowledge and which is stored in the computer's memory, its use in evidence depends upon the credibility of an identifiable person. It would therefore constitute real evidence. QUESTION 15 While presenting the state's case on a charge of escaping from prison, the prosecution wants to present evidence about the accused's latest previous conviction. Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. The evidence falls under state privilege and is therefore inadmissible. 2. The evidence is inadmissible in terms of section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. 3. The evidence is admissible in terms of section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. 4. The evidence is similar fact evidence and therefore admissible. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. The evidence of the accused's latest previous conviction is inadmissible unless it is relevant to show a pattern of behavior or a propensity to escape, and even then, it must meet the criteria set out in section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Act. This section governs the admissibility of evidence of previous convictions. QUESTION 16 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Photographs may sometimes constitute real evidence, particularly when the photograph is used to represent some situation and that situation is the subject matter of a court case. 2. The word “document” is a very wide term and includes pictures and photographs. 3. A dispute about the authenticity of a document is dealt with by way of a trial within a trial. 4. Section 212 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides that certain evidence can be presented in a written form, such as by an affidavit or certificate. Such evidence is documentary evidence and the normal requirements for the admissibility of documentary evidence are applicable to such evidence. QUESTION 17 During a civil matter, the plaintiff wants to present the record of a witness's evidence in a criminal trial based on the same facts, as violence against the defendant. The evidence will be: 1. admissible opinion evidence. 2. evidence about a previous consistent statement. 3. hearsay evidence 4. similar fact evidence. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. The record of the witness's evidence in the criminal trial may be considered hearsay if it is being offered for the truth of the statements made by the witness in the criminal trial. However, there are exceptions to the hearsay rule that may make this evidence admissible, such as the prior recorded testimony exception. QUESTION 18 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. If a witness is re-examined on a new matter, the opposing party will have the right cross-examine the witness on this new matter. 2. In civil cases the court may, out of its own accord and without the consent of the parties involved, call witnesses 3. A witness in a criminal case can refuse to answer a question that is relevant to a fact in issue if such an answer can prove civil liability on his part. 4. Refreshing of memory by a witness usually occurs during cross-examination when a witness can no longer accurately recall the events on which he is being cross-examined. If a witness is re-examined on a new matter, the opposing party will have the right to cross-examine the witness on this new matter in order to test the credibility and reliability of the witness's testimony. QUESTION 19 Cocky is arrested for stabbing his wife with a knife. As the arresting police officer is explaining the reasons for his arrest, Cocky exclaims: "But I defended myself!” This statement is ... 1. a formal admission. 2. hearsay evidence. 3. a confession. 4. an informal admission, Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 20 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Section 192 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, which deals with the competence and compellability of witnesses to testify, refers to the residuary provision in section 206 of the Criminal Procedure Act. This means that English law, as it currently applies in England, is applicable. 2. The law of evidence is unique because it is part of the substantive law and the adjective law. 3. The Roman-Dutch law is the common-law source of our substantive law, but the common-law source of our procedural law is English law. 4. Section 252 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, which deals with character evidence, is an example of a residuary section. The Roman-Dutch law is the common-law source of substantive law in South Africa, while the procedural law is based on English law. This means that while the principles of evidence and competence of witnesses may be influenced by English law in certain provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act, the substantive law is based on Roman-Dutch law. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 1 Consider the following statements about circumstantial evidence and choose the correct option: 1. Circumstantial evidence is not necessarily weaker than direct evidence and the cumulative effect of several pieces of circumstantial evidence might even carry more weight than direct evidence. 2. The following rules apply to inferences drawn from circumstantial evidence in a civil case: the inference sought to be drawn must be consistent with all the proven facts and must be the only reasonable inference. 3. The following rules apply to inferences drawn from circumstantial evidence in a criminal case: the inference sought to be drawn must be consistent with all the proven facts and must be the most probable inference. 4. Direct evidence will always carry more weight than circumstantial evidence. Option 1 is the correct statement. Circumstantial evidence can be just as strong as direct evidence, and the cumulative effect of multiple pieces of circumstantial evidence can carry significant weight in a case. In some cases, circumstantial evidence can be the primary factor in determining guilt or innocence. Direct evidence is not always more powerful than circumstantial evidence, and the weight of evidence depends on the specific circumstances of each case. QUESTION 2 Consider the following statements about admissions and confessions and choose the correct option: 1. Evidence presented during a trial-withinra trial will only be allowed in the main trial if it directly relates to the facts in issue in the main trial, 2. A statement that was made without prejudice and in good faith can be disclosed if it constitutes an act of insolvency. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 3. Since an admission amounts to a statement adverse to the person making It, no person can ever make an “admission” which will be held against another person. 4. The content of a confession that was voluntarily made, but that is inadmissible because some other requirement for admissibility was not met, may still be admissible if it is relevant and contains an admission. QUESTION 3 The accused is forced to point out the weapon that he used to kill his wife. Evidence about his act of pointing out the gun will be ... 1. inadmissible in terms of section 218(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. 2. inadmissible in terms of section 218(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. 3. admissible in terms of section 218(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. 4. admissible in terms of section 218(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. QUESTION 4 The issue is whether defendant drove negligently, a witness states: “I observed an incident from my office window. The defendant's car was proceeding from west to east. I could see that he was in a hurry and was prepared to weave through the traffic, despite the presence of pedestrians. | had a feeling that an accident would take place, and when it happened, i also had no doubt about who was responsible. It was the defendant.” Consider the following statement and choose the correct option 1. The witness's opinion about a fact in issue is in principle inadmissible because it is irrelevant Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 2. The witness's opinion about a fact in issue is admissible because he observed such a fact. 3. The witness's opinion about a fact in issue is in principle inadmissible only if it is about a primary issue in dispute. 4. The witness's opinion about a fact in issue is in principle admissible if it is about a secondary issue in dispute. The witness's opinion about a fact in issue is admissible because he observed such a fact. The witness directly observed the defendant's actions and behavior, and therefore his opinion about the defendant's negligence is relevant and admissible as it is based on his firsthand observation of the incident. QUESTION 5 An elderly woman is found dead in her apartment. The bloody scene leaves no doubt that she was murdered. Various pieces of evidential material are found at the scene of the crime. This includes fingerprints. The fingerprints will be classified as ... 1. evidence of uncertain classification. 2. expert evidence. 3. real evidence. 4. documentary evidence. The fingerprints found at the scene of the crime will be classified as real evidence. This is because they are physical evidence directly related to the crime and can be analyzed and used in the investigation to identify potential suspects. Real evidence includes tangible objects, such as weapons, clothing, and biological evidence like fingerprints, that can be used to support a case. In this case, the fingerprints found at the crime scene are crucial real evidence that can be used to help solve the murder. QUESTION 6 Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. A bank is robbed and afterwards the police find certain metal boxes containing money in a ditch. The boxes are identified as those that were taken from the bank. A few days later the accused is taken into custody. He confesses that he took part in the robbery, but the confession does not comply with the requirements of section 217 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. Consequently, upon his confession the accused takes the police to the ditch where the containers were found and says to them that this is the place where the money was hidden. 1. Because the pointing out forms part of the inadmissible confession it can never be admissible evidence 2. Because the accused followed up the Inadmissible confession with a pointing out of the place where the containers had been left. the inadmissible confession now becomes admissible. 3. The pointing out of the containers amounts to an admission and will be admissible if there was no coercion on the part of the police 4. Section 35(5) of the Constitution of 1996 is irrelevant in this situation The reason for this is that while the confession itself may be inadmissible, the accused's act of leading the police to the location where the containers were hidden can be considered as a separate act of admission. If it can be proven that the accused's actions were not a result of coercion or duress from the police, then the pointing out of the containers can be admitted as evidence in court. This is in line with the principles of admissibility of evidence, as well as the requirement for evidence to be obtained in a manner that respects the rights of the accused. QUESTION 7 Two accused are charged with dealing in cocaine Accused A testifies that he received a packet with unknown contents from accused B to keep for accused B He states that he had no knowledge of the contents of the packet and thus places the blame squarely on accused 8 The prosecution now wants to question accused A about two previous convictions for possession of and dealing on cocaine Such questioning by the prosecution Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 1. will be inadmissible in terms of section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 2. will be admissible in terms of section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 3. will be admissible in terms of section 2S2 of the Criminal Procedure Act SI of 1977 4. will be inadmissible in terms of section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 The reason is that section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 prohibits the questioning of an accused person about previous convictions unless the accused person has given evidence of good character or has placed his or her character in issue during the trial. Since accused A has not given evidence of good character or placed his character in issue, the questioning about his previous convictions for possession and dealing of cocaine would be inadmissible. QUESTION 8 A 14-year-old complainant was raped by two young men, At the time of the rape she did not report the matter to her parents or lay charges, but briefly told Vanessa, a friend, about the incident. Nineteen years later the complainant accidentally met one of her assailants. These revived memories of her ordeal and prompted her to lay charges against the men who raped her. The complainant testifies during the case. Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. Because the case is of a sexual nature, the court must approach the complainant's evidence with caution. 2. Vanessa's evidence is admissible hearsay evidence. 3. Vanessa's evidence is evidence about a previous consistent statement. 4. Vanessa's evidence is inadmissible hearsay evidence. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 9 Y is accused of the theft of a shotgun The gun had belonged to a person who had meanwhile died At his trial, Y pleads not guilty and according to his explanation of plea the reason for his possession of the gun is that the accused had given it to him The state now calls the deceased's brother The brother says. 'My late brother wrote to me from his sickbed that Y would be keeping his gun for turn He said he was too sick to fetch the gun himself and asked me to do it Y, however. refused to grve it back. I hand in the letter' Consider the following statements and choose the correct option 1. Evidence of the letter will probably be inadmissible hearsay 2. Evidence of the letter will only be opinion evidence about what the late brother implied 3. Evidence of the letter will probably be admissible hearsay 4. Evidence of the letter will only be circumstantial evidence. The letter from the deceased's brother is likely to be considered admissible hearsay because it is a statement made by the deceased about the ownership of the gun and the accused's possession of it. It is being presented in court as evidence of the deceased's intentions and actions, and it is relevant to the case. However, the admissibility of the letter may also depend on the specific rules of evidence in the jurisdiction where the trial is taking place. QUESTION 10 A copy of a typed contract stands to be admitted in court The contract will 1. constitute documentary evidence where it is admitted for the purpose of proving the existence of the written contract in circumstances where one of the parties denies that a written contract was ever created 2. constitute documentary evidence where it is admitted to establish the terms of the contract 3. constitute circumstantial evidence where it is admitted for the purpose of proving the existence of the written contract in circumstances where one of the parties denies that a written contract was ever created Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 4. constitute real evidence where it is admitted to establish the terms of the contract. QUESTION 11 Consider the following statements and choose the correct option 1. According to Magmoed v Janse van Rensburg 1993 (1) SACR 67 (A), a witness must be informed about his or her privilege against self incrimination on unless, based on the facts of the case, he or she could be expected to be aware of this privilege 2. A witness on a criminal case may refuse to answer a question for the reason that the answer may bring about civil liability on his part 3. For obvious reasons, private privilege only exists during the trial and not also during all pre-trial procedures 4. Privileged evidence is excluded because it is irrelevant According to Magmoed v Janse van Rensburg 1993 (1) SACR 67 (A), a witness must be informed about his or her privilege against self-incrimination unless, based on the facts of the case, he or she could be expected to be aware of this privilege. It is important for a witness to be aware of their privilege against self-incrimination in order to protect their legal rights during the proceedings. QUESTION 12 A and B partakes in a cash in-transit on the N1-highway and manage to get away. After Illegally monitoring A's private conversations, the police raid his house. Upon entering As house, the police inform A that they intend to use him as a witness against B and that they do not therefore intend to prosecute him. A consequently makes a statement that fully implicates him in the crime and that leads the police to some of the stolen money in the ceiling of A's house, as wes pointed out by A. Notwithstanding their Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. previous undertaking, the police decide to charge A. Consider the following statements and choose the correct option: 1. As statement is an inadmissible confession. 2. A's statement is an admissible confession. 3. As set of pointing out the money ts an admissible informal admission 4. As statement is an inadmissible admission. QUESTION 13 Consider the following statements about admissions and confessions and choose the correct option: 1. A formal admission does not place the fact admitted beyond dispute. It can be made in the pleadings or during the trial. Since that does not place the admitted fact beyond dispute, further evidence needs to be adduced about 2. A trial within a trial is normally held to determine the competence and compellability of a witness. 3. In terms of section 217(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, the prosecution may prove an otherwise inadmissible confession if the accused adduces evidence of any statement made by hen as part of, or in connection with this confession, and if this evidence is, in the opinion of the judicial officer presiding at the proceedings, unfavourable to that person. 4. if the witness in a civil case tells the court that something was admitted by another person, such evidence will constitute hearsay evidence and the court will therefore have to decide whether it should admit the hearsay evidence in the interest of justice after exercising its judicial discretion in this regard. QUESTION 14 Consider the following statements about the evaluation of evidence and choose the correct option: Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. 1. In criminal cases the state always bears the onus of proof regarding all issues and defences. 2. In both criminal and civil cases, the evidentiary burden is only relevant at the end of a trial. 3. The silence of an accused may affect the evidentiary burden and could therefore cause the accused to be convicted. 4. When evaluating circumstantial evidence, it is important for the court to consider each piece of circumstantial evidence in isolation. In criminal cases, it is the prosecution (state) that bears the burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.. QUESTION 15 Consider the following statements about admissions and confessions and choose the correct option 1. A statement is a confession if it was freely and voluntarily made by a person in his sound and sober senses and without having been unduly influenced thereto 2. A statement that is meant to be exculpatory can be an admission if, in the end, it is to the detriment of the maker thereof 3. A confession which was voluntarily made, but which is inadmissible because some other requirement for admissibility was not met, may still be admissible if It is relevant and contains an admission. 4. A subjective test is used to determine whether a statement Is an admission, and an objective test is used to determine whether such a statement was voluntarily made Option 1 is the correct statement. A confession is indeed considered to be freely and voluntarily made if the person was in their sound and sober senses and not unduly influenced. This is a fundamental requirement for a confession to be admissible in court. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document. This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or transmitted in any form or by any means. QUESTION 16 Examples of real evidence can include the following things 111 the appearance of a person, (2) tape recordings, (3) fingerprints. (4) documents and (5) blood tests Consider the following options and choose the correct option 1. All the examples can be real evidence 2. Only examples (3) and (5) can be real evidence 3. Only examples (1) and (3) can be real evidence 4. Only examples (4) and (5) can be real evidence Option 1 is correct - all the examples listed can be considered real evidence. The appearance of a person can be used as evidence in identifying a suspect or witness, tape recordings can be used to provide audio evidence, fingerprints can be used to link a person to a crime scene, documents can be used as evidence of written or recorded information, and blood tests can be used to provide evidence of a person's health or presence at a crime scene. QUESTION 17 An accused has been convicted of seriously assaulting the complainant The complainant, unfortunately. later dies of complications because of this assault The accused is therefore charged with murder and the prosecution now wishes to pose questions to the accused about the mentioned previous conviction