Nkosi and Another v S (A260/2021)
Nkosi and Another v S (A260/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 50 (19 April 2022)
The court found that the first appellant was correctly identified as the driver of the stolen vehicle and failed to provide any credible explanation for his possession. The doctrine of recent possession did not strictly apply due to the time lapse since the theft, but the facts supported a conviction under section 36 of the General Law Amendment Act. The first appellant's conviction for theft was set aside and substituted with a conviction under section 36. The second appellant, although present and fleeing with the first appellant, did not have sufficient evidence against him to prove posses…
Source excerpt
- Theft
- Recent Possession Doctrine
- Identification Evidence
- Competent Verdict
- Circumstantial Evidence
- Section 36 Glaa