Question 1

A is a student who receives a NSFAS funding.

NSFAS pays R14 million into A's account by mistake.

A is very happy with this 'gift' and immediately go on a shopping spree. She spends R800 000.

Which statement is correct?

The student did not know she was not entitled to the 14 million rand. She did not go to NFSAS
and ask for the money; it was paid into her account and therefore the person who mistakenly
paid it into her account, must be held criminally liable.

The student should not be prosecuted. The prosecutor has a discretion when it comes to
instituting prosecution. A is a young student who is still immature and thought she was just
merely 'blessed' when the money was paid into her account.

In the court case, Nissan South Africa (PTY) Ltd v Marnitz 2005 (1) 441 (SCA) the court indicated
that if a person receives money into his bank account in his name knowing that he is not
entitled to it and then uses it, he commits theft.

In the court case, Nissan South Africa (PTY) Ltd v Marnitz 2005 (1) 441 (SCA) the court indicated
that if a person receives money into his bank account in his name knowing that he is not
entitled to it and then uses it, he commits fraud.

Question 2

The facts of this question is repeated as the questios are all randomised.

A, B and C decided to commit a robbery of a jewellery shop. All 3 were armed with fire-arms.

The police received a tip-off and were waiting for them. One of the robbers, A, tried to escape from
being apprehended. A ran off and grabbed a bystander, C as a hostage.

In the shoot-out between the police and A, the bullet of the police official struck C and she was
killed.

A, B and C are charged for the murder of C.

The facts are similar to the following ________ (provide the name of the case).

Question 3

I am repeating the facts already referred to an another question since the questions are
randomised.

A took out 3 life insurance policies with 3 different companies on B (who did not exist; she merely
made up a name/identity). A pays the life insurance policies, collectively worth R980 000 for a few
months. When the waiting period on these policies had passed, she decided to institute her claim
but she had a problem. In order for her to claim, she needed a body that had to certified dead by a
doctor. She approached a funeral parlour owner, B who then 'lend' her a body which she could
present to a doctor for a death certificate. She paid B approximately R2000.
The police got a tip off otherwise no one would most probably have been arrested and this type of
scam could have continued.

Question: For which crime is B prosecuted? Only 1 word, small letters (lower case).

Question 4
A stole a vehicle in Johannesburg. He is arrested in Cape Town for the stolen
vehicle.
Indicate which statement is correct.
Theft is a continuous crime. A must be prosecuted in Cape Town because he
was arrested in Cape Town with the stolen vehicle. The court in Cape
Town will have territorial jurisdiction.
Theft is a continuous crime. A must be prosecuted in Johannesburg because he
stole the vehicle in Johannesburg. The court in Johannesburg will have
territorial jurisdiction.
Theft is a continuous crime. A may be prosecuted in Cape Town or
Johannesburg. The court in Cape Town or Johannesburg will have territorial
jurisdiction and the prosecutors will have to decide where to institute the
prosecution.

Question 5
Indicate true or false.
Money laundering is a common law crime.
True

False

Question 6
Dr Michael Greelis, an American professional counsellor opines - and his opinion
is supported by many others - that white-collar criminals are worsen than other
criminals.
Question: Why is there an opinion that white collar criminals are worse than
others?
Indicate which statement shows that white collar criminals are worse than other
criminals.
Take note: It does not mean that you agree with the opinion.
A criminal who breaks into vehicle and steals a handbag with an amount
of money engage in a low-risk, high reward crime whereas a white collar
criminal engage in a high risk, low reward crime for example stealing money
through a Ponzi scheme.
A criminal who breaks into vehicle and steals a handbag with an amount of
money engage in a high-risk, low reward crime as the criminal can be shot at
whereas a white collar criminal engage in a low risk, high reward crime for
 example stealing money through a Ponzi scheme.
A white collar criminal is seldomly prosecuted whereas a criminal who
commits a violent crimes will always be prosecuted.

Question 7
The husband of Kealeboga Shuping (accused) was taking a bath when she entered
the bathroom, poured petrol on the floor of the bathroom and set it alight. She then
locked the bathroom door. The victim sustained severe burn wounds and
subsequently died of the burns sustained.
The accused may be charged for:
Murder and malicious damage to property
Culpable homicide and malicious damage to property
Murder and arson
Culpabe homicide and arson

Question 8
In 2020 it was reported that Ndlovu, a high school dropout, worked as a medical
intern at five KwaZulu-Natal hospitals and clinics. She alleged that she had obtained
her medical qualification from Wits. WITS indicated that she had never been a
registered student and that she therefore had not obtained a medical degree from
WITS. She spent at least two years at various public health facilities practising under
the 'guise' of being a qualified medical doctor.
Question: Should she be prosecuted?

No, she cannot be charged with fraud as her conduct does not comply with the
elements for fraud. She may have made a misrepresentation but did not pose
an actual threat. No one died as a consequence of her actions.
No, she cannot be charged criminally. She may have pretended to be qualified
medical doctor but the hospitals where she worked and who paid her salary,
should be held civilly accountable by the patients.
Yes, she may be charged with faking her identity.
Yes, she may be charged with fraud as her conduct complies with the elements
for fraud.

Question 9
A few weeks ago, A takes his very expensive car for a service. Two mechanics take the car
on a ‘joy drive’ and make an accident. They are charged for theft but plead not guilty. The
two mechanics state that they never had dolus to deprive the owner permanently of his
property. They merely drove to the shop to buy food when the accident happened.
Which statement is correct?
 The accused will be found not guilty on theft but convicted on section 36 of the General
Amendment Act 62 of 1955 as they did not have consent to use the car. It is a
competent verdict to the common law crime, theft.
The accused will be acquited as they did not have dolus to deprive the owner
of his property.
The accused will be found not guilty on theft and cannot be convicted on section
36 of the General Amendment Act 62 of 1955 as it was not mentioned in the
charge sheet.

Question 10
A took out 3 life insurance policies with 3 different companies on B (who did not
exist; she merely made up a name/identity). A pays the life
insurance policies, collectively worth R980 000 for a few months. When the waiting
period on these policies had passed, she decided to institute her claim but she had a
problem. In order for her to claim, she needed a body that had to certified dead by a
doctor. She approached a funeral parlour owner who then 'lend' her a body which
she could present to a doctor for a death certificate.
A was now able to lodge the insurance claims.
The police received a tip off pertaining to A and B's conduct otherwise A may have
been successful in her claim.

Question: For which crime is A prosecuted? Only 1 word, small letters (lower case).

Question 11
A approaches B and offers him a week holiday in Mauritius (once COVID19
allows travel) and in return he wants B to use his influence to ensure that a tender
for providing personal protective equipment (PPE) is awarded to him. A does not
have any prior experience with PPEs but he knows someone who can assist him.
B decides to report this matter.
Indicate which statement is correct.

A did not commit any crime. He is an entrepreneur and it is important that

business people are prepared to see new opportunities, learn new skills and
accept new challenges. By prosecuting A, one is suppressing such
entrepreneurial skills which will be to the disadvantage of the South African
economic growth.
A may be charged with attempted corruption. He only attempted to commit the
crime as the other party, B, was not prepared to accept the offer.
A cannot be charged with corruption in terms of legislation since corruption
consists of 2 parties (an offer and acceptance) and double intent. In the
provided set of facts, B is not a party to the unlawful conduct as B did not
participate in the conduct.
A may be charged with corruption. There was an offer and although it was not
accepted, evidence by B will be presented to show that two parties were
 involved. There were double intent based on the offer made to B and B who
could have accepted it.

Question 12
Read the set of facts:
The accused set up a micro-lending or so called pyramid scheme (also referred to
as a ponzi scheme) in which the accused persuaded 'investors' from the public to
place amounts which on an agreed date shall be repayable with interest at the
exceedingly seductive rate of 2,5% per month. At the inception of the scheme the
investment amounts and the promised interest were seemingly repaid.
In time existing depositors had to be repaid with the money rolled over from
the deposits of the new investors. It was only a matter of passage of time before
several investors lost their money. There were 21 complainants (in some instances,
complainants would be too embarassed to lay a complaint).
The victims were chosen and targeted by design and without mercy. They were by
and large elderly, vulnerable a possessed of pension or other lump sum. The
victims believed that their funds would be in safe investments.

The modus operandi described above is used for most pyramid scheme.
My comment: If it is sound too good to be true it is not true?
The accused is charged with 21 counts of theft of which the total amount stole is
R2 215 000, 000.
The amounts stolen per charge were in the range of R12 000 to R350 000.
The accused is convicted on 21 counts.

Question: In respect of sentence, which statement is correct?

The 21 convictions of theft are taken together and the accused may be
sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. The court will find that section 51 part II
read with schedule 2 of the Minimum Sentencing Act is applicable.
The convictions on 21 counts should be seen as one encounter and therefore
the accused should only be sentenced for one count although there were 21
complainants. One intent and the same evidence were required to commit the
theft which involved 21 complainants.
The 21 convictions of theft cannot be taken together but the accused must be
sentenced for each count seperately. Imprisonment may be imposed for each
count. The accused can then be ordered to serve the sentence cumulative
(together).

Question 13
Assume A (girlfriend) discovers B (boyfriend of 4 years) has been having an
affair.
She is so annoyed that sets his car alight. She knows how much he loves his car. B
saved a long time to be able to buy a second hand car. He has no insurance on the
car.
She is also annoyed to think that this 'girl' drove in the car.
Read the following statement and indicate true or false:
She committed the crime of arson in respect of the motor vehicle.

True

False

Question 14
In 2019 a South African 'pilot' resigned from South African Airways (SAA) after it
transpired that he had flown commercial planes for 20 years with a fake license.
Indicate which statement is correct.
The pilot may not be charged criminally as it was the duty of the SAA to
verify his qualifications. The SAA only discovered it when there was an
accident and the accident only happened after the pilot had flown for 20 years.
The pilot may be charged with uttering and forgery.
Uttering consists of unlawfully and intentionally making a false document to the
actual or potential prejudice of another. Forgery consists of unlawfully and
intentionally passing off a false document (forged) to the actual or potential
prejudice of another.
The pilot may be charged with forgery and uttering.
Forgery consists of unlawfully and intentionally making a false document to the
actual or potential prejudice of another. Uttering consists of unlawfully and
intentionally passing off a false document (forged) to the actual or potential
prejudice of another.

Question 15
A (a high school school teacher and 34 years old) is at a party when B approaches
her. B says that he is from Ghana and does not have a bank account. He wants to
know if he can pay R5 million into A's bank account and she must then transfer the
money to an account in Ghana. B is prepared to pay A R20 000 for the use of her
bank account. A talks to her husband about B's request who informs her that he has
heard that B is a drug trafficker and that she must not get involved in this. A thinks
about the R20 000 and what she can buy with it. She informs B that he may
transfer the money which he does.
A may be committing the following crime: ________________(small letters,
please check your spelling)

Question 16
A and B are friends. B hears that A has stolen a car and is driving to Cape Town. B
asks A if he can drive along to Cape Town. In Bloemfontein, there is a road block.
The car has been reported as stolen and both A and B are arrested for theft of a
vehicle.
Indicate which statement is correct.
 B did not steal the car and can only be charged as an accessory after the fact.
B did not steal the car and can only be charged as accomplice.
B cannot be charged as he was not involved in the theft of the vehicle.
B will be charged as a perpetrator.

Question 17
A says to B: "Hand over your cellphone and any cash you have or else...."
B hands over voluntarily the cellphone and cash.
A cannot be charged with robbery but only theft of the cellphone and the cash.
Indicate true or false.
True

False

Question 18
Indicate true or false.
Electricity is intangible and cannot be stolen.
True

False

Question 19
A, B and C decided to commit a robbery of a jewellery shop. All 3 were armed
with fire-arms.
The police received a tip-off and were waiting for them. One of the robbers, A,
tried to escape from being apprehended. A ran off and grabbed a bystander, C as a
hostage.
In the shoot-out between the police and A, the bullet of the police official struck C
and she was killed.
A, B and C are charged for the murder of C.
Indicate which statement is correct.
The police official whose bullet struck the innocent bystander must be charged
for murder. C took the hostage to protect himself from being arrested. C could
not foresee that the police official would fire at him and endanger the hostage.

All 3 will be convicted for murder based on the principle of common purpose.
A, B and C may be charged for robbery but not for murder. C went on a frolic
of his own when he took the hostage and only C may be convicted of
murder. A and B did not have dolus eventualis in respect of the death of the
hostage.

Question 20
Please take note: The facts have already been used at another question
but repeated since the questions are randomised.
Read the set of facts:
The accused set up a micro-lending or so called pyramid scheme (also referred to
as a ponzi scheme) in which the accused persuaded 'investors' from the public to
place amounts which on an agreed date shall be repayable with interest at the
exceedingly seductive rate of 2,5% per month. At the inception of the scheme the
investment amounts and the promised interest were seemingly repaid.
In time existing depositors had to be repaid with the money rolled over from
the deposits of the new investors. It was only a matter of passage of time before
several investors lost their money. There were 21 complainants (in some instances,
complainants would be too embarassed to lay a complaint).
The victims were chosen and targeted by design and without mercy. They were by
and large elderly, vulnerable a possessed of pension or other lump sum. The
victims believed that their funds would be in safe investments.

The modus operandi described above is used for most pyramid scheme.
The accused is charged with 21 counts of theft of which the total amount stole is
R2 215 000, 000.
The amounts stolen per charge were in the range of R12 000 to R350 000.
The accused is convicted on 21 counts.

The issue of sentence in respect of the provided facts is outlined in which court
case? Please check your spelling. It e.g. van der Merwe (van der are small letters).
The principle laid down in this case pertaing to sentence is referred to in
commercial courts.

Question 21
Read the following set of facts (and these facts are repeated at other questions):
A, B and C agreed to meet at a the house of A and to depart from there to church.
A and B were already in B's car and waited for C to get into the car.
At that stage 3 men appeared in the drive way. One the men aimed his firearm at
C and the complainants were directed to hand over their possessions.
A got out of the vehicle and one of the accused requested A to hand over her
handbag and her car keys to the accused. The other complainants also handed their
car keys to the accused. The 3 accused departed in two vehicles with the personal
belongings of the 3 complainants.
The accused are charged for 3 counts of robberies in the regional court.
Question: Was there 3 counts of robberies or was there only one count of robbery?
There were 1 count of robberies. The evidence and intent tests indicate 1 count
of robbery.
It amounts to duplication of convictions to convict the accused on 3 counts of
robberies.
 There were 3 counts of robberies. The evidence and intent tests indicate 3
counts of robberies.
Duplication of convictions is about fairness towards the accused and it is not
fair to convict the accused for 3 robberies when the robberies happened at one
encounter with a single intent to rob the complainants and the evidence for the
encounter is the same.

Question 22
A is the owner of a shop.
One of his employees, B who have worked for him for some time, steals money. B
is caught on the surveillance camera taking money out of the till.
A confronts B in front of the other employees, shows him the surveillance footage
whereupon B acknowledges he took the money. A says to B that he has a choice: either he
gives him punishment (hiding) or he lays a charge of theft at the police station and fires him.
B gives consent to be 'physically punished' whereupon B gives him a severe hiding on his
buttocks with a rod. A says to the other employees that this should serve as deterrence
to them not to steal.
B lays a charge of assault against A. B also institutes a civil claim against A.

Indicate which statement is correct.

A will be convicted for assault. No one can inflict corporal punishment on
another and no one can give consent (volenti non fit iniuria) to be
physically punished.
A should not have been prosecuted.
B should have been prosecuted for theft. He committed a crime and had it not
been for his conduct, A would not have had to resort to such drastic measures.
A had no choice but punish B in front of the other employees to show that
crime does not pay and will not go unpunished.

A will not be convicted for assault. B gave consent. It was his choice to be
punished for a crime he had committed. He was caught on the surveillance
camera taking the money. A has a right to protect his property.

Question 23
B discovers that A has been stealing from the company over a period of 2 years. A
is in senior management and he is person with authority. A says to B that if B
wants to keep his job, he will not disclose to anyone that theft has been committed.
A indicates to B that B will not get testimonial from him if he wishes to apply for
another job.
The company receives an anonymous tip-off that A has committed theft.
Whistle-blowers (people who discloses crime) should be protected.
A is charged for theft and may also be charged of _______ (small letters, see
spelling)
Question 24
• Please take note: The facts have already been provided at another
question but repeated as the questions are randomised:
Read the following set of facts:
A, B and C agreed to meet at a the house of A and to depart from there to church.
A and B were already in B's car and waited for C to get into the car.
At that stage 3 men appeared in the drive way. One the men aimed his firearm at
C and the complainants were directed to hand over their possessions.
A got out of the vehicle and one of the accused requested A to hand over her
handbag and her car keys to the accused. The other complainants also handed their
car keys to the accused. The 3 accused departed in two vehicles with the personal
belongings of the 3 complainants.
The accused are charged for 3 counts of robberies in the regional court.
Question: Why is it relevant to establish whether it is one count or 3 counts?
It is relevant for the purpose of __________ (provide the word in small
letters).

Question 25
A is experiencing dire financial problems.
He decides to set fire to his own house which is insured and to claim the insurance
money from the insurer.
On a night in September he sets fire to his house. A alleges that the house was
struck by lightening and burnt down. However, the insurer looks at the weather
report and discovers that it only rained on the fateful night. There was no thunder
nor lightening. The fire fighters also conducted their own investigation on what
caused the fire and it transpired that petrol had been poured at 2 different places in
the house and set alight. It also appears as if the gas stove had been turned on. The
fire was started intentionally.
Indicate which statement is correct.
A is charged with arson.

A is not charged at all. He was in financial trouble and he was desperate. The
insurer never paid out the money and therefore the insurer never lost any
money. A lost his house in the fire and he is even worse off now than before
the fire. One should treat desperate people humanely.
A is charged with fraud and malicious damage to property. A cannot be
charged with arson of his own immovable property.
A is charged with fraud and may also be charged with arson of his own
immovable property as he set fire to it for insurance purposes.

Question 26
A employs B.
B confronts A with a knife and forces A to transfer the sum of R14 000 from his
bank account electronically into B's bank account. It is done by means of online
banking.

Question: Did this amount to the crime of robbery?

Yes, it can be robbery. The conduct complies with the elements for robbery.

No, it cannot be robbery. It can only be theft.

No, it cannot be common law crimes such as robbery nor theft as this was
done electronically.

The common law deals only with tangible objects and here money was
transferred electronically. It was all done in an intangible medium: no one
touched the money physically.

Question 27
A took out a vehicle insurance policy. The insurance policy provided that if there
is a claim for an accident where the driver is the holder of a learner driver's
license then the excess (additional excess) will be higher. At the time of the
accident, A's wife, B was driving. B only had a learner driver's license. A put in an insurance
claim. A indicated that he (A) had been driving the vehicle at the time of the accident. A
claimed R37 000. At a later stage before payment was affected, A acknowledged to the
insurer that his wife, B had been driving the car. He indicated that although she had only
learner driver's license at the time of the accident, she had subsequently obtained her
license.
The insurer refused to pay out and indicated that the policy holder, A, had lied when he
submitted the insurance claim.
Indicate which statement is correct.
A will not be charged with fraud. His conduct does not comply with the
elements of the fraud. The insurer was not prejudiced as the insurer never paid
out the money. The insurer did not suffer any financial loss.
A will not be charged with fraud. A's conduct does not comply with the
elements for a fraud. A had not made a misrepresentation. He told them the
truth about the identity of driver at the time of the accident.
A will be charged with fraud. His conduct complies with the elements for
fraud: there was misrepresentation and potential prejudice. It may amount to
'soft' fraud but it is still fraud.

Question 28
A is annoyed with B. She scratches his car with her key.
A lays a charge of __________________ (small letters; please check your spelling)
Question 29
• Please take note: The facts have already been provided at another
question but repeated as the questions are randomised:
Read the following set of facts:
A, B and C agreed to meet at a the house of A and to depart from there to church.
A and B were already in B's car and waited for C to get into the car.
At that stage 3 men appeared in the drive way. One the men aimed his firearm at
C and the complainants were directed to hand over their possessions.
A got out of the vehicle and one of the accused requested A to hand over her
handbag and her car keys to the accused. The other complainants also handed their
car keys to the accused. The 3 accused departed in two vehicles with the personal
belongings of the 3 complainants.
The accused are charged for 3 counts of robberies in the regional court.
Provide the name of the SCA case (ensure that you spell it correctly) that provided
clarity on duplication of convictions.

Question 30
A works in a factory that manufactures furniture. He wants to steal some of the
furniture.
At the end of the day when all the other employees are leaving, he hides inside the
factor. The factory is locked.
He unlocks the door from the inside and allows B and C in to assist him with the
removal of the furniture. They put the furniture in a truck and leave.
Indicate which statement is correct.
A may be charged with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.

A may be charged with theft.

A may be charged with robbery.

A may be charged with trespassing in terms of the Trespass Act 6 of 1959.