This study addresses the principles applicable to criminal capacity in the South African legal system. Focus is drawn to non-pathological criminal incapacity as a complete defence to a criminal charge. Non-pathological criminal incapacity can be described as the temporary inability on the part of the perpetrator to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct and/or to act in accordance with this appreciation. This mental inability is due to factors which cannot be ascribed to a pathological condition or mental illness. The study further investigates the application of the subjective and objective test as criteria for the defence of provocation and indicates the preferred test. The study also includes a discussion of the following aspects: • The study further investigates the application of the subjective and objective test as criteria for the defence of provocation Non-pathological criminal incapacity distinguished from pathological criminal incapacity • Non-pathological criminal incapacity distinguished from "sane" automatism • The role of amnesia in considering criminal capacity • The role of the expert witness in considering non-pathological criminal incapacity • Private defence versus battered woman syndrome and cumulative provocation • Criminal capacity and sentence. In the South African law the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity was considered on numerous occasions by the High and Appeal Court, though mostly unsuccessful. It is also clear that the South African courts confuse the issue and fail to differentiate between the defences of non-pathological criminal incapacity and "sane" automatism. The study indicates that the two defences, though different, coincide. The South African courts increasingly raised the standard and requirements for a successful plea in an attempt to confine the popularity of the "new" defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity. A comparative study of the English and Canadian law indicates that provocation is only considered as a partial defence to murder, and only to reduce murder to manslaughter. The reasoning behind this was to evade the compulsory sentence of life imprisonment for murder by substituting it with a conviction of manslaughter where life imprisonment is not a compulsory sentence. The central question raised in this study is whether non-pathological criminal incapacity be a qualified and complete defence to any criminal charge in the South African law. Finally the study is concluded with a crisp summary of every preceding chapter and valuable recommendations stemming from the research are made. / Dissertation (LLM (Public Law))--University of Pretoria, 2008. / Public Law / unrestricted

The current study addresses the fundamental role of expert evidence advanced in support of the defence of criminal incapacity. It was endeavoured to illustrate that the scientific entities of forensic psychiatry and psychology fulfil an essential and pivotal role in establishing and assessing the defence of criminal incapacity. The study proposed to illustrate the interaction between the professions of law and medicine on the backdrop of the defence of criminal incapacity. Recommendations were provided with the aim of enhancing the dialogue between the professions of law and medicine when the defence of criminal incapacity falls to be assessed. The study was approached from a dual dimensional perspective illustrating both the need for mental health experts as well as the need for adequately trained and experienced mental health experts to provide expert testimony as to an accused’s mental state when the defence of criminal incapacity is raised. The motivation for the current study is enumerated and the concepts of “criminal capacity”, “non-pathological criminal incapacity”, “pathological criminal incapacity” and “expert evidence” are, amongst others, conceptualized. It is indicated that expert evidence plays an essential role not only in cases where pathological criminal incapacity, or put differently, criminal incapacity attributable to mental illness or mental defect is raised, but also in instances where non-pathological criminal incapacity is raised as a defence. The role of the mental health expert is addressed with reference to battered woman syndrome evidence advanced in support of the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity. It is illustrated that the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity is in need of reform. It is in addition illustrated that legislative reform is essential to establish the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity and to create legal certainty. The inconsistent approach in the application of expert evidence to the defence of criminal incapacity is emphasized with specific focus on the semantic distinction between the defences of non-pathological criminal incapacity and pathological criminal incapacity. The role and application of the DSM-IV in the definition and assessment of mental disorders is addressed in conjunction with the various obstacles associated with the application of the DSM-IV to the defence of criminal incapacity. The nature and scope of the basic rules of expert evidence as they would apply to mental health professionals acting as expert witnesses in support of the defence of criminal incapacity are addressed. The assessment of the probative value of expert evidence is addressed and the complexities associated therewith are espoused. The numerous ethical dilemmas faced by mental health experts are illustrated and recommendations are provided aimed at eliminating these dilemmas. A comparative study of selected principles pertaining to expert evidence in the United States of America is embarked upon to illustrate the need for a codification of the rules of expert evidence as well as effective guidelines aimed at enhancing the scientific reliability and validity of expert evidence advanced in support of the defence of criminal incapacity. Finally, conclusions are drawn and motivated recommendations are made. Law reform is proposed in the form of draft proposals for legislative reform in respect of the defence of criminal incapacity as well as a draft ethical code of conduct for mental health experts providing expert testimony in cases where the defence of criminal incapacity is raised. / Thesis (LLD)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Public Law / unrestricted

The South Africa criminal law allows the battered woman to raise a battered woman syndrome defence in the context of non-pathological criminal incapacity. However, there is a need of expert evidence to support such defence for it to succeed in the court of law. Hence, this paper scrutinizes the task of expert evidence in support of the battered woman syndrome in order to reach the extent of its effectiveness. Nevertheless, such evidence is not indispensable but without it, the court hardly gets persuaded resulting into the failure of the defence. The meaning of battered woman syndrome is articulated in the paper as well as the fact that battered woman syndrome defence falls under the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity. The origin and development of the non-pathological criminal incapacity has also been discussed by comparing it with pathological criminal incapacity which emanates from mental illness while the former does not originate from a mental illness. Psychiatrist are in a better position to understand the latter while psychologists are in a better position to understand the former, hence it is advisable if the court pays more attention or attach more weight to the evidence given by the psychologists if this defence is to succeed and have a brilliant future. Moreover, the possible defences available to the battered woman have been mentioned as well as the cases that used non-pathological criminal incapacity as a defence particularly with regard to the battered woman syndrome defence. Both cases that were successful and unsuccessful have been elaborated. However, the cases that failed with the defence are in large numbers than the successful ones. Although expert evidence is essential to support the battered woman syndrome defence, it is unjustly and unfairly applied on the battered woman who is an accused person in the court leading to the failure of the defence .In short the use of expert evidence has failed in its application as the two professions, law and medicine has failed to make this defence work as they have not reached an agreement concerning the battered woman syndrome defence. In addition, the paper looks at the obstacles linked with the battered woman syndrome defence as well as offering suggestions to be put in place in order to make the use of expert evidence achievable. This can only be done if both the lawyers and mental health professionals come to terms with each other where they are able to understand the battered woman syndrome and the actions which led to the situation where battered woman finds herself as an accused person. Finally, the paper concludes that expert evidence has failed tremendously in its application leading to the failure of the battered woman syndrome defence in the context of non-pathological criminal incapacity. Consequently a lot still needs to be done to protect the women who face numerous obstacles; both personal and legal as they do not face justice in court and everyone must take part to put an end to battering of women which is inhuman and morally wrong. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Public Law / unrestricted

This dissertation critically investigates the current framework for psycholegal assessment of accused persons who are suspected or alleged to have lacked criminal incapacity at the time of committing an offence. This system must function as effectively as possible to ensure the interests of justice and the community are best served. Issues that impact how effectively the criminal justice system collaborates with psychologists and psychiatrists, who act as expert forensic mental health assessors, are identified and recommendations are made accordingly. The study first examines the theoretical base regarding the terminology surrounding criminal capacity, mental illness and automatism, with regard to how the understanding of concepts differ in law and psychology and psychiatry and how this negatively affects the process of assessment. The study then investigates the constitutional rights of accused persons admitted for observation, the effect this has on the patient and legal process, the accuracy and reliability of the diagnosis and the admissibility of expert evidence. Next a comparative study is made utilising English Law as a tool for analysis. The main findings are that lack of understanding and clarity are the main issues that hinder the collaboration between the legal and mental health care professions and that this may be remedied by a system of registration and education for forensic psycholegal assessors. An alternate and concurrent method of direct referral is also suggested as it may relieve some of the strain on the current system. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Public Law / unrestricted

In March 2012, the Durban High Court found three accused guilty of murder on two of the accused’s parents. The Lotter case was covered extensively by the media, because of its unusual story: The two Lotter siblings claimed that they were brainwashed by the sister’s boyfriend as he had made them believe that he was the third son of God. As the siblings’ defences they decided to use the controversial defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity. This dissertation gives an extensive outline of case law that has covered this defence. While attempting to define this defence, the courts have limited its uses to such an extent, that it appears to be abolished. Viewpoints of academic authors have been considered to assist the reader in defining new borders for this defence. Redefinition is necessary in light of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. Concepts such as ‘coercive persuasion’ are explained in terms of psychological, psychiatric and legal backgrounds. Other countries have taken measures to restrict the use of coercive persuasion, specifically religious coercive persuasion. We therefore compare South Africa’s lack of legislation to those countries that have adopted anti-coercive persuasion legislation as the Constitution permits that foreign law may be taken into account when interpreting and developing the law. There is also a discussion on the role of expert evidence in a South African court, specifically the psychologist, as well as discussion on Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and the Battered Partner/Spouse/ Wife syndrome in context of coercive persuasion. Coercive persuasion is viewed in terms of the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity – as a prevailing factor that discredits the second (conative) leg of the capacity test: The ability to act in accordance with right and wrong. Defences such as automatism and private defence are also considered in context of coercive persuasion. By analysing the case of Cézanne Visser along with the other cases that considered the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity, one is able to view that the Lotter case is not the first case that mentions a person coercively persuaded by her partner to commit crimes. After the discussion of the Lotter case (the facts and judgment are covered in detail), similarities are drawn between the two women that were coercively persuaded by their partners. An alternative judgment and sentence reveals that the Lotter case had an opportunity to develop the defence, in context of coercive persuasion, and in light of the Constitution, but failed to do so. The recommendations that follow are based on the defective dialogue that occurs between psychologists and psychiatrists, the unnecessary absence of expert evidence in court, the transformation of the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity, a development of the term ‘coercive persuasion’ for purposes of the court when considering cases that deals with religious practices and the lack of legislative protection for women who murder their abusive husbands. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Public Law / unrestricted

Text in Afrikaans / Die verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid in die Suid-Afrikaanse strafreg word bespreek. Hierdie verweer is van onlangse oorsprong en verskil van die verwere van ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid as gevolg van jeugdigheid en geestesongesteldheid soos in artikel 78(1) van die Strafproseswet 51 van 1977 uiteengesit word. Die verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid dek gevalle waar dit deur faktore soos emosionele spanning veroorsaak is. Hierdie verweer staan ook as die algemene ontoerekeningsvatbaarheidsverweer bekend. In 'n aantal beslissings, soos onder andere, S v Arnold 1985 (3) SA 256 (C); S v Campher 1987 (1) SA 940 (A) en S v Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A), word die gevolgtrekking gemaak dat die verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid wei in die Suid-Afrikaanse strafreg bestaansreg het. Ten einde met 'n verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid te slaag, is die blote ipse dixit van die beskuldigde onvoldoende. 'n Behoorlike grondslag vir die verweer moet gele word. Die bewyslas in die geval van 'n verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid word bespreek. / The defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity in the South African criminal law is discussed. It is a relatively new defence and should be distinguished from the defences such as youth and mental illness set out in section 78(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. This defence covers cases in which criminal capacity is excluded by factors such as intoxication and emotional stress. It is also known as a general defence of criminal incapacity. In a number of cases, inter alia in S v Arnold 1985(3) SA 256 (C); S v Campher 1987 (1) SA 940 (A) and S v Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1 097 (A) the conclusion is reached that the defence, non-pathological criminal incapacity, does have a right of existence in the South African criminal law. In order to successfully raise the defence on non-pathological criminal incapacity, the mere ipse dixit of the accused is insufficient. A proper foundation for the defence must be laid. The onus of proof is discussed. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL. M.

Text in Afrikaans / Die verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid in die Suid-Afrikaanse strafreg word bespreek. Hierdie verweer is van onlangse oorsprong en verskil van die verwere van ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid as gevolg van jeugdigheid en geestesongesteldheid soos in artikel 78(1) van die Strafproseswet 51 van 1977 uiteengesit word. Die verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid dek gevalle waar dit deur faktore soos emosionele spanning veroorsaak is. Hierdie verweer staan ook as die algemene ontoerekeningsvatbaarheidsverweer bekend. In 'n aantal beslissings, soos onder andere, S v Arnold 1985 (3) SA 256 (C); S v Campher 1987 (1) SA 940 (A) en S v Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A), word die gevolgtrekking gemaak dat die verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid wei in die Suid-Afrikaanse strafreg bestaansreg het. Ten einde met 'n verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid te slaag, is die blote ipse dixit van die beskuldigde onvoldoende. 'n Behoorlike grondslag vir die verweer moet gele word. Die bewyslas in die geval van 'n verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid word bespreek. / The defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity in the South African criminal law is discussed. It is a relatively new defence and should be distinguished from the defences such as youth and mental illness set out in section 78(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. This defence covers cases in which criminal capacity is excluded by factors such as intoxication and emotional stress. It is also known as a general defence of criminal incapacity. In a number of cases, inter alia in S v Arnold 1985(3) SA 256 (C); S v Campher 1987 (1) SA 940 (A) and S v Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1 097 (A) the conclusion is reached that the defence, non-pathological criminal incapacity, does have a right of existence in the South African criminal law. In order to successfully raise the defence on non-pathological criminal incapacity, the mere ipse dixit of the accused is insufficient. A proper foundation for the defence must be laid. The onus of proof is discussed. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL. M.

Summaries in Afrikaans and English / Text in Afrikaans / 'n Kort elementologiese uiteensetting vir strafregtelike aanspreeklikheid word gevolg deur bewysregtelike begrippe wat van toepassing is op vermoedens by toerekeningsvatbaarheid. Die historiese regsposisie asook die ontwikkeling in die huidige Suid-Afrikaanse reg met betrekking tot geestesongesteldes, kinders en persone wat 'n verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid insluit, word bespreek. Daar word gekonsentreer op ·die ontwikkeling van 'n algemene verweer van niepatologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid. Die konstitusionele reg, vennoedens en ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid word aan die hand van Suid-Afrikaanse regspraak en die Interim Grondwet bespreek. Daar word na buitelandse reg gekyk ten einde 'n aanbeveling te kan maak wat grondwetlik nie sal indruis op die reg van die individu tot onskuld nie. 'n Algemene verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningvatbaarheid word onderstellll mits dit met omsigtigheid deur die howe benader word. Die arbitrere ouderdomsgrens vir vasstelling van toerekeningsvatbaarheid by kinders word gekritiseer en 'n verhoorbaarheidvasstellingseenheid word aanbeveel. / A short elementological discussion of criminal responsibility is followed by concepts of law of evidence that is applicable to presumptions of accountability. The historical legal position as well as the development in the current South African law and the present legal position with reference to the mentally disturbed children and persons with a defence of non-pathological unaccountability are included and discussed. The constitutional law, presumptions and unaccountablility are discussed with reference to the South African case law and the Interim Constitution. Foreign law is perused so that a recommendation could be made that would not interfere with the rights of the individual to be deemed innocent. A general defence of non-pathological unaccountability is supported if it is treated with the necessary circumspection by the courts. The arbitrary age boundaries for the determination of accountability in children is critized and a unit to determine trialability for pathological and non-pathological accountability is recommended. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M.

Summaries in Afrikaans and English / Text in Afrikaans / 'n Kort elementologiese uiteensetting vir strafregtelike aanspreeklikheid word gevolg deur bewysregtelike begrippe wat van toepassing is op vermoedens by toerekeningsvatbaarheid. Die historiese regsposisie asook die ontwikkeling in die huidige Suid-Afrikaanse reg met betrekking tot geestesongesteldes, kinders en persone wat 'n verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid insluit, word bespreek. Daar word gekonsentreer op ·die ontwikkeling van 'n algemene verweer van niepatologiese ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid. Die konstitusionele reg, vennoedens en ontoerekeningsvatbaarheid word aan die hand van Suid-Afrikaanse regspraak en die Interim Grondwet bespreek. Daar word na buitelandse reg gekyk ten einde 'n aanbeveling te kan maak wat grondwetlik nie sal indruis op die reg van die individu tot onskuld nie. 'n Algemene verweer van nie-patologiese ontoerekeningvatbaarheid word onderstellll mits dit met omsigtigheid deur die howe benader word. Die arbitrere ouderdomsgrens vir vasstelling van toerekeningsvatbaarheid by kinders word gekritiseer en 'n verhoorbaarheidvasstellingseenheid word aanbeveel. / A short elementological discussion of criminal responsibility is followed by concepts of law of evidence that is applicable to presumptions of accountability. The historical legal position as well as the development in the current South African law and the present legal position with reference to the mentally disturbed children and persons with a defence of non-pathological unaccountability are included and discussed. The constitutional law, presumptions and unaccountablility are discussed with reference to the South African case law and the Interim Constitution. Foreign law is perused so that a recommendation could be made that would not interfere with the rights of the individual to be deemed innocent. A general defence of non-pathological unaccountability is supported if it is treated with the necessary circumspection by the courts. The arbitrary age boundaries for the determination of accountability in children is critized and a unit to determine trialability for pathological and non-pathological accountability is recommended. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M.

This study evaluates the constitutionality of section 78(1B) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (CPA), which places the burden of proving criminal capacity on the party who raises the issue, against section 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (CRSA). In a legal system such as ours, that has a high regard for equality, any form of unequal treatment must be scrutinised, assessed and, if found to be unjust, rooted out. Even more so where the unequal treatment affects a marginalised minority group such as the mentally disabled. This study weighs section 78(1B) against section 9(1) of the CRSA. It also weighs the section against section 9(3) of the CRSA. Attempts are made to justify possible infringements according to section 36 of the CRSA. An appropriate remedy is then ascertained. This study also provides the historical development of section 78(1B) of the CPA – both in the common law and statute. This study furthermore provides original guidelines and principles in assessing expert evidence where criminal capacity is placed in dispute due to a mental illness or defect of the accused. The main findings are that section 78(1B) infringes on both section 9(1) and section 9(3), that it cannot be justified in terms of section 36 of the CRSA and that the appropriate remedy is the striking out of the whole section from the CPA. Copyright / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Public Law / unrestricted