D.Ed. (Psychology Of Education) / The writer's personal experience as educational adviser at a TED aid centre shows that theft amongst children often occurs. Of significance is the frequency of theft occuring in younger children. Statistics obtained from the Central Statistics Service show that theft amongst children in South Africa is reaching alarming proportions. Theft is one of the misdemanours of a child that is commonly not handled pedagogically correctly by the parent It may well be that people steal due to a physical need, however, the reason for theft by children is more complex and profound than mere physical need. Before therapeutic action can be taken, it is imperative that some attempt be made to get to know the child better. This study includes a literature study as well as an empirical investigati m. Within the framework of the literature study, an attempt is made to gain perspective on the problem of theft by children. Attention is given to information obtained from literature pertaining to tl e child who steals in respect of contributory causes: personality theory, learning theories and personality development theories; a short discussion of the child in the senior primary and junior secondary school phases; as well as the treatment of the child who steals. The empirical investigation includes the pedo- and psycho-diagnostic testing of a number of children that steal. By means of case studies an attempt is made to uncover those factors that cause these children to steal. For this purpose school children in the senior primary and junior secondary school phases who had been reported to TED aid centres on the East Rand for theft behaviour were included in this investigation. Information was obtained by using the form which is completed upon reporting to the centre; the results of selective tests; interviews with the child's parents or custodians; and discussion with the child himself or herself. The analysis of the case studies is largely qualitative, although it includes quantitive facets as well...

No Abstract available / Jurisprudence / L.LD.

No Abstract available / Jurisprudence / L.LD.

Text in Afrikaans / Theft in South African law is one of the most well-known common law crimes. It is also one of the crimes in respect of which opinions vary considerably. Furtum possessionis is one of the manifestations of the crime of theft at common law. The general requirements of furtum possessionis were already established in Roman law. Emphasis was not placed on the taker of the thing but on the particular position of the person who was deprived of the property. This approach was also followed in Roman-Dutch law. Fur tum possessionis in South African law can be defined as follows: It is the unlawful and intentional appropriation by the owner or someone else of a movable corporeal thing in commercio, in circumstances in which the possessor of the thing has a valid right of retention of the thing, with the intention of depriving the possessor permanently of control of the thing. Theft in the form of furtum possessionis differs in an important respect from theft in the form of the removal of a thing. In the case of removal the complainant can also be a person acting as a holder, that is someone exercising control of the thing on behalf of the owner. In the case of furtum possessionis the complainant is the person with the right of retention and from whose possession the thing is taken away. The accused either possesses the thing as an owner or as a holder before possession of the thing was transferred to the complainant. Mere possession is not enough. The possession of the complainant has to be accompanied by a right to retention. Furthermore the possession of the thing has to be lawful / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M. (Criminal & Procedural Law)

Text in Afrikaans / Theft in South African law is one of the most well-known common law crimes. It is also one of the crimes in respect of which opinions vary considerably. Furtum possessionis is one of the manifestations of the crime of theft at common law. The general requirements of furtum possessionis were already established in Roman law. Emphasis was not placed on the taker of the thing but on the particular position of the person who was deprived of the property. This approach was also followed in Roman-Dutch law. Fur tum possessionis in South African law can be defined as follows: It is the unlawful and intentional appropriation by the owner or someone else of a movable corporeal thing in commercio, in circumstances in which the possessor of the thing has a valid right of retention of the thing, with the intention of depriving the possessor permanently of control of the thing. Theft in the form of furtum possessionis differs in an important respect from theft in the form of the removal of a thing. In the case of removal the complainant can also be a person acting as a holder, that is someone exercising control of the thing on behalf of the owner. In the case of furtum possessionis the complainant is the person with the right of retention and from whose possession the thing is taken away. The accused either possesses the thing as an owner or as a holder before possession of the thing was transferred to the complainant. Mere possession is not enough. The possession of the complainant has to be accompanied by a right to retention. Furthermore the possession of the thing has to be lawful / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Criminal & Procedural Law)