Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { <http://wikidata.dbpedia.org/resource/Q17041937> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 16 of
16
with 100 triples per page.
- Q17041937 subject Q6995945.
- Q17041937 abstract "S v Mlonyeni, an important case in South African criminal procedure, was an appeal against the convictions of the appellants on two charges of murder in connection with traditional witch-craft practices and the modern method of 'necklace' killings.The court held that the provisions of s144(3)(a)(i) of the CPA are explicitly to the effect that the State is not bound by the contents of the summary of substantial facts.There is, therefore, no obligation on the State to seek an amendment to its summary, whether before or after it leads evidence which may be in conflict therewith.If it does seek such an amendment before the leading of evidence, it is to the advantage, and not to the prejudice, of the defense in at least two respects: it warns the defense that the summary is incorrect; and it provides ammunition for the cross-examination of witnesses who may have furnished the information on which the summary was based.As the State is not bound by the summary and is not precluded from leading evidence at variance with such summary, the question whether the court has the power to permit the amendment of the summary of substantial facts is largely academic.".
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q1155476.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q1269627.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q132821.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q1347572.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q195414.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q196939.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q258.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q259745.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q329777.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q5185599.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q5185633.
- Q17041937 wikiPageWikiLink Q6995945.
- Q17041937 comment "S v Mlonyeni, an important case in South African criminal procedure, was an appeal against the convictions of the appellants on two charges of murder in connection with traditional witch-craft practices and the modern method of 'necklace' killings.The court held that the provisions of s144(3)(a)(i) of the CPA are explicitly to the effect that the State is not bound by the contents of the summary of substantial facts.There is, therefore, no obligation on the State to seek an amendment to its summary, whether before or after it leads evidence which may be in conflict therewith.If it does seek such an amendment before the leading of evidence, it is to the advantage, and not to the prejudice, of the defense in at least two respects: it warns the defense that the summary is incorrect; and it provides ammunition for the cross-examination of witnesses who may have furnished the information on which the summary was based.As the State is not bound by the summary and is not precluded from leading evidence at variance with such summary, the question whether the court has the power to permit the amendment of the summary of substantial facts is largely academic.".
- Q17041937 label "S v Mlonyeni".