South Africa Case Law

Lamprecht v S (A141/2013)

Lamprecht v S (A141/2013) [2017] ZAFSHC 43 (16 March 2017)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A141/2013

Judges

Musi, Rampai

The court found that the appellant was guilty of theft on two bases: first, the direct evidence of Heymans, which was accepted by the regional magistrate and not challenged on appeal, implicated the appellant in the commission of the offence. Second, the appellant's own version demonstrated his central involvement in the registration and concealment of the stolen vehicle, with no rational explanation for his conduct other than knowledge or reckless disregard of the vehicle's stolen status. The court emphasized that theft is a continuing crime, and the appellant's assistance in concealing the…

Source excerpt

• Theft
• Accessory Liability
• Possession Of Recently Stolen Property
• Continuing Crime

Ssengendo v S (A564/13)

Ssengendo v S (A564/13) [2014] ZAWCHC 147 (22 September 2014)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A564/13

Judges

Dolamo, Samela, Weinkove

The court set aside a theft conviction but upheld accessory-after-the-fact liability for concealing a murder. The sentence was reduced after crediting pretrial custody.

• Theft
• Accessory After The Fact
• Sentencing Principles
• Continuing Crime
• Mitigation Of Sentence
• Accessory-after-the-fact