Criminal Procedure - Chapter 12 - Cases
S v Mahlangu
S v Whitehead
You can't substitute one crime for another
Through the acts of violence people died
The court said it was basically just a name change
The court said you can make an amendment but not a substitution
The elements or essence of the crimes were the same
Offence of bribery - name change - offence of corruption
The charge of bribery did not exist anymore
The court allowed it in this case only because there is no difference in the way that he would present his case
Was this a singular criminal transaction or were the acts so distinct in nature that you can separate them so that it is not just one crime of public violence or murder
These tests are not decisive or conclusive and the courts wont just look at these and nothing else – they will look at all the evidence holistically
Defendants were charged and convicted of both culpable homicide and public violence
Test 2 - single intent test
You cannot convict people of both, this is a duplication of convictions
Test 1 to test if a duplication has occurred - separate facts (evidence test)
Looks at the elements of both offences and look at whether separate facts are needed to prove each offence or is an identical set of facts used
If the same facts and elements or evidence prove the 2 offences then it is essentially the same crime and it is a duplication of convictions to be convicted of both
Is there one similar or the same sort of intent required with both offences if so then it is a duplication of convictions