Bilankulu and Another v S (188/2020)
Bilankulu and Another v S (188/2020) [2020] ZASCA 114 (29 September 2020)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the undercover operation did not go beyond providing an opportunity to commit the offences, and thus the evidence of Khosa was automatically admissible under s 252A of the Criminal Procedure Act. The late disclosure of cell phone records did not prejudice the appellants' right to a fair trial, as they were given sufficient time to study the records and no actual prejudice was demonstrated. The court found that the appellants had the requisite legal intent (dolus indeterminatus) for murder, as they must have foreseen the possibility of a shoot-out with ran…
Source excerpt
- Murder
- Unlawful Hunting Of Rhinoceros
- Entrapment
- Admissibility Of Evidence
- Dolus Eventualis
- Non Parole Period