CRW2602 Criminal Law: Specific Crimes Advanced Prep:
Master Crimes Against the State & Property Practice
Questions & Detailed Explanations
Subject: CRW2602 (Criminal Law: Specific Crimes) | Subtopic: Crimes Against
the State and Property Crimes
Question 1: In the context of the crime of high treason, which of the following elements most
accurately distinguishes it from sedition under South African common law?
A) High treason requires an intention to overthrow the government, whereas sedition only
requires inciting public disorder.
B) High treason must involve physical violence, whereas sedition is purely verbal.
C) High treason is directed at the sovereignty of the state, whereas sedition is directed at the
maintenance of public order and the authority of the state.
D) There is no substantive legal distinction between high treason and sedition in modern South
African criminal law.
Correct Answer: C) High treason is directed at the sovereignty of the state, whereas sedition
is directed at the maintenance of public order and the authority of the state.
Explanation: High treason is the most serious crime against the state, involving an unlawful,
intentional act committed by a person who owes allegiance to the state, with the intent to
overthrow, impair, or coerce the state's authority or sovereignty. Sedition is a lesser crime
involving the unlawful, intentional participation in a collective gathering with the intent to defy
or subvert the state's authority without necessarily seeking to overthrow the state entirely.
Distractors are incorrect because sedition does not require "purely verbal" acts, and the
distinction in the protected legal interest is clearly defined in common law.
Question 2: A defendant is charged with arson after intentionally setting fire to a derelict
structure that they believed was abandoned. During the trial, it is revealed that the structure was,
in fact, a registered historical site. How does this affect the requirement of "unlawfulness" in
arson?
A) The defendant's subjective belief that the structure was abandoned negates the element of
intent.
B) Arson requires the damage of property belonging to another; therefore, the historical status is
irrelevant.
C) The intent to set fire to any structure satisfies the requirement of arson, regardless of the
defendant's subjective belief regarding ownership or status.
,D) Arson is a crime of strict liability; therefore, the defendant's knowledge is irrelevant.
Correct Answer: C) The intent to set fire to any structure satisfies the requirement of arson,
regardless of the defendant's subjective belief regarding ownership or status.
Explanation: Arson is defined as the intentional and unlawful setting on fire of an immovable
structure belonging to another. The requirement of "intent" refers to the intent to set the fire and
the knowledge that the object is an immovable structure; it does not require a specific intent to
destroy a structure belonging to a specific person or with specific historical value. The belief
that it was abandoned might be a mitigating factor but does not negate the unlawful nature of the
act.
Question 3: Regarding the crime of public violence, which of the following scenarios best
satisfies the requirement of "a number of people"?
A) A husband and wife shouting at a police officer during a domestic dispute.
B) A group of five individuals protesting at a university, causing the disruption of a lecture.
C) Two rival gangs meeting in an open field to engage in a pre-arranged fistfight.
D) A single person causing chaos in a shopping mall by knocking over displays.
Correct Answer: B) A group of five individuals protesting at a university, causing the
disruption of a lecture.
Explanation: Public violence requires the unlawful and intentional commission of acts by a
number of people, which are of a sufficiently serious nature to manifest an intention to forcibly
disturb the public peace or order, or to impair the safety of the public. While "a number of
people" is not explicitly defined by a specific digit, it implies a collective action that poses a
threat to public order. Option C describes a private fight, and Option A describes a private
dispute. Option B implies the collective disruption of public order.
Question 4: A person steals a laptop but, upon realizing it contains sensitive data they did not
intend to see, leaves it at a police station. Can this person still be charged with theft?
A) No, because they returned the property voluntarily before being caught.
B) Yes, because the crime of theft was completed the moment the contrectatio (taking) occurred.
C) No, because the intent to permanently deprive was negated by the return of the item.
D) Yes, but only if the laptop was not damaged.
Correct Answer: B) Yes, because the crime of theft was completed the moment the
contrectatio (taking) occurred.
,Explanation: Theft is a completed crime as soon as the act of contrectatio (unlawful taking) is
coupled with the intention to steal. Returning the item (restitution) does not negate the initial
completion of the crime; it may only influence sentencing. The intent to permanently deprive is
established at the time of the taking, regardless of subsequent changes of heart.
Question 5: Which of the following elements is essential to distinguish robbery from theft?
A) The value of the property taken.
B) The use of violence or a threat of violence.
C) The existence of a prior relationship between the parties.
D) The location where the incident occurred.
Correct Answer: B) The use of violence or a threat of violence.
Explanation: Robbery is effectively theft aggravated by the use of violence or threats of violence,
either immediately before or during the taking of property. Without this element of violence or
threat, the crime remains theft. Value, location, and relationships are auxiliary factors that do
not fundamentally differentiate the definition of robbery from theft.
Question 6: A defendant enters a house through an unlocked door with the intent to steal but,
before taking anything, finds a police officer waiting inside. What crime has been committed?
A) Housebreaking with intent to steal.
B) Attempted theft.
C) Trespassing.
D) Housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.
Correct Answer: A) Housebreaking with intent to steal.
Explanation: Housebreaking with intent to steal is a completed crime as soon as the entry
(breaking) is combined with the intent to commit a crime (theft), even if the intended theft does
not occur. Option D is incorrect because the theft was not completed. Option C is a lesser
offense subsumed by the more serious common-law crime of housebreaking.
Question 7: In the crime of malicious injury to property, what constitutes "damage"?
A) The item must be completely destroyed.
B) The item must have lost its commercial value.
, C) There must be an infringement of the owner's property rights, including the utility or
functioning of the item.
D) The damage must be permanent and irreparable.
Correct Answer: C) There must be an infringement of the owner's property rights, including
the utility or functioning of the item.
Explanation: Malicious injury to property is the unlawful and intentional damaging of property
belonging to another. The courts have interpreted "damage" broadly; it does not need to be total
destruction. Any infringement on the owner’s right to enjoy their property—such as making a car
temporarily unusable or damaging its aesthetic utility—suffices.
Question 8: A person finds a lost wallet and immediately decides to keep the cash inside while
discarding the wallet. What is the status of this act?
A) It is not theft because the property was lost, not stolen.
B) It is theft, provided the finder knows who the owner is or has reasonable grounds to believe
the owner can be found.
C) It is only theft if the wallet was left in a public place.
D) It is an act of misappropriation, not theft.
Correct Answer: B) It is theft, provided the finder knows who the owner is or has reasonable
grounds to believe the owner can be found.
Explanation: Theft by finding occurs when a person finds lost property and, at the time of
finding, forms the intention to appropriate it, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
the owner can be identified. If the finder truly believes the owner cannot be found, the element of
unlawfulness is absent.
Question 9: Under the crime of fraud, is it possible to commit the crime if the victim is not
actually deceived, but the attempt is made?
A) No, fraud is only completed if the victim suffers actual prejudice.
B) Yes, if the perpetrator intended to deceive and prejudice the victim.
C) No, because fraud is a result crime requiring actual deception and resultant prejudice.
D) Yes, but it would be classified as forgery, not fraud.
Correct Answer: C) No, because fraud is a result crime requiring actual deception and
resultant prejudice.
Master Crimes Against the State & Property Practice
Questions & Detailed Explanations
Subject: CRW2602 (Criminal Law: Specific Crimes) | Subtopic: Crimes Against
the State and Property Crimes
Question 1: In the context of the crime of high treason, which of the following elements most
accurately distinguishes it from sedition under South African common law?
A) High treason requires an intention to overthrow the government, whereas sedition only
requires inciting public disorder.
B) High treason must involve physical violence, whereas sedition is purely verbal.
C) High treason is directed at the sovereignty of the state, whereas sedition is directed at the
maintenance of public order and the authority of the state.
D) There is no substantive legal distinction between high treason and sedition in modern South
African criminal law.
Correct Answer: C) High treason is directed at the sovereignty of the state, whereas sedition
is directed at the maintenance of public order and the authority of the state.
Explanation: High treason is the most serious crime against the state, involving an unlawful,
intentional act committed by a person who owes allegiance to the state, with the intent to
overthrow, impair, or coerce the state's authority or sovereignty. Sedition is a lesser crime
involving the unlawful, intentional participation in a collective gathering with the intent to defy
or subvert the state's authority without necessarily seeking to overthrow the state entirely.
Distractors are incorrect because sedition does not require "purely verbal" acts, and the
distinction in the protected legal interest is clearly defined in common law.
Question 2: A defendant is charged with arson after intentionally setting fire to a derelict
structure that they believed was abandoned. During the trial, it is revealed that the structure was,
in fact, a registered historical site. How does this affect the requirement of "unlawfulness" in
arson?
A) The defendant's subjective belief that the structure was abandoned negates the element of
intent.
B) Arson requires the damage of property belonging to another; therefore, the historical status is
irrelevant.
C) The intent to set fire to any structure satisfies the requirement of arson, regardless of the
defendant's subjective belief regarding ownership or status.
,D) Arson is a crime of strict liability; therefore, the defendant's knowledge is irrelevant.
Correct Answer: C) The intent to set fire to any structure satisfies the requirement of arson,
regardless of the defendant's subjective belief regarding ownership or status.
Explanation: Arson is defined as the intentional and unlawful setting on fire of an immovable
structure belonging to another. The requirement of "intent" refers to the intent to set the fire and
the knowledge that the object is an immovable structure; it does not require a specific intent to
destroy a structure belonging to a specific person or with specific historical value. The belief
that it was abandoned might be a mitigating factor but does not negate the unlawful nature of the
act.
Question 3: Regarding the crime of public violence, which of the following scenarios best
satisfies the requirement of "a number of people"?
A) A husband and wife shouting at a police officer during a domestic dispute.
B) A group of five individuals protesting at a university, causing the disruption of a lecture.
C) Two rival gangs meeting in an open field to engage in a pre-arranged fistfight.
D) A single person causing chaos in a shopping mall by knocking over displays.
Correct Answer: B) A group of five individuals protesting at a university, causing the
disruption of a lecture.
Explanation: Public violence requires the unlawful and intentional commission of acts by a
number of people, which are of a sufficiently serious nature to manifest an intention to forcibly
disturb the public peace or order, or to impair the safety of the public. While "a number of
people" is not explicitly defined by a specific digit, it implies a collective action that poses a
threat to public order. Option C describes a private fight, and Option A describes a private
dispute. Option B implies the collective disruption of public order.
Question 4: A person steals a laptop but, upon realizing it contains sensitive data they did not
intend to see, leaves it at a police station. Can this person still be charged with theft?
A) No, because they returned the property voluntarily before being caught.
B) Yes, because the crime of theft was completed the moment the contrectatio (taking) occurred.
C) No, because the intent to permanently deprive was negated by the return of the item.
D) Yes, but only if the laptop was not damaged.
Correct Answer: B) Yes, because the crime of theft was completed the moment the
contrectatio (taking) occurred.
,Explanation: Theft is a completed crime as soon as the act of contrectatio (unlawful taking) is
coupled with the intention to steal. Returning the item (restitution) does not negate the initial
completion of the crime; it may only influence sentencing. The intent to permanently deprive is
established at the time of the taking, regardless of subsequent changes of heart.
Question 5: Which of the following elements is essential to distinguish robbery from theft?
A) The value of the property taken.
B) The use of violence or a threat of violence.
C) The existence of a prior relationship between the parties.
D) The location where the incident occurred.
Correct Answer: B) The use of violence or a threat of violence.
Explanation: Robbery is effectively theft aggravated by the use of violence or threats of violence,
either immediately before or during the taking of property. Without this element of violence or
threat, the crime remains theft. Value, location, and relationships are auxiliary factors that do
not fundamentally differentiate the definition of robbery from theft.
Question 6: A defendant enters a house through an unlocked door with the intent to steal but,
before taking anything, finds a police officer waiting inside. What crime has been committed?
A) Housebreaking with intent to steal.
B) Attempted theft.
C) Trespassing.
D) Housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.
Correct Answer: A) Housebreaking with intent to steal.
Explanation: Housebreaking with intent to steal is a completed crime as soon as the entry
(breaking) is combined with the intent to commit a crime (theft), even if the intended theft does
not occur. Option D is incorrect because the theft was not completed. Option C is a lesser
offense subsumed by the more serious common-law crime of housebreaking.
Question 7: In the crime of malicious injury to property, what constitutes "damage"?
A) The item must be completely destroyed.
B) The item must have lost its commercial value.
, C) There must be an infringement of the owner's property rights, including the utility or
functioning of the item.
D) The damage must be permanent and irreparable.
Correct Answer: C) There must be an infringement of the owner's property rights, including
the utility or functioning of the item.
Explanation: Malicious injury to property is the unlawful and intentional damaging of property
belonging to another. The courts have interpreted "damage" broadly; it does not need to be total
destruction. Any infringement on the owner’s right to enjoy their property—such as making a car
temporarily unusable or damaging its aesthetic utility—suffices.
Question 8: A person finds a lost wallet and immediately decides to keep the cash inside while
discarding the wallet. What is the status of this act?
A) It is not theft because the property was lost, not stolen.
B) It is theft, provided the finder knows who the owner is or has reasonable grounds to believe
the owner can be found.
C) It is only theft if the wallet was left in a public place.
D) It is an act of misappropriation, not theft.
Correct Answer: B) It is theft, provided the finder knows who the owner is or has reasonable
grounds to believe the owner can be found.
Explanation: Theft by finding occurs when a person finds lost property and, at the time of
finding, forms the intention to appropriate it, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
the owner can be identified. If the finder truly believes the owner cannot be found, the element of
unlawfulness is absent.
Question 9: Under the crime of fraud, is it possible to commit the crime if the victim is not
actually deceived, but the attempt is made?
A) No, fraud is only completed if the victim suffers actual prejudice.
B) Yes, if the perpetrator intended to deceive and prejudice the victim.
C) No, because fraud is a result crime requiring actual deception and resultant prejudice.
D) Yes, but it would be classified as forgery, not fraud.
Correct Answer: C) No, because fraud is a result crime requiring actual deception and
resultant prejudice.
