Study unit 2 Common law perjury and Statutory perjury PDF

Preview

Summary

SUMMARY NOTES...

Description

PART 1

PART 1: CRIMES AGAINST THE STATE

STUDY UNIT 2: CRIMES AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Common law perjury

the making a false declaration

under oath (or affirmation or promisie to tell the truth)

in the course of a legal proceeding

intentional

unlawfully

COMMON LAW PERJURY Definition Elements

Know and understand Making of a false declaration

• •

•

Under oath ( or any other equivalent)

•

In the course of a legal proceedings

• • •

Can be verbal or written. The statement must be false (objective) this means that if a person unwittingly tells the truth but thinks he is lying (his intention is to lie) he does not commit perjury in terms of SA law. Although he may be charged with attempted perjury. The statement does not have to be material to the issue at hand.

Perjury can only be committed after a person has taken an oath (section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA) or an affirmation to tell the truth (section 163) or an admonition to tell the truth. (Section 164). Perjury can only be committed in the course of either a criminal or civil proceeding. If a person makes a false affidavit ( statement under oath/ affirmation/ admonition) outside that of a legal proceedings he may be charged in terms of sect 9 of the Justice of the Peace and Commissioners Oaths Act . What happens is a person makes a false statement to the police during an investigation of an offence? Is this perjury? Remember that the statement was not made in the course of legal proceedings. The Beukman case ruled that perjury can be committing by making a false statement outside court. There are

2 requirements. See Page 16 of guide. PS: this rule does not apply to criminal cases. It only applies to civil proceedings.

Unlawfulness

•

Intentional

• •

Statutory Perjury

• •

STATUTORY PERJURY

If a person makes a false statement, then acknowledges he lied and then tells the truth, he still commits perjury. Making a false statement to use as a defence is no excuse. Must know that declaration is false or see the possibility that declaration is false. Section 319 (3) of Criminal procedure act. – making conflicting statements under oath. eThe state has to prove that two different statements were made under oath and that the statements contradict each other. Page 336 of prescribed book.

Definition

If a person made any statement under oath , whether orally or in writing , and he thereafter on another oath makes another statement which is in conflict with the first statement.

Reason why the crime was created

It is very often difficult to prove common law perjury. Often people who have made false declaration cannot be convicted. During an investigation of a crime police usually take statements from people to get more information on the crime. It can be embarrassing for the prosecution if a case is based on this statement and the witness comes to court and makes a contradicting statement. If a person makes contradicting statement it is difficult to prove which is true and which is false. It is also difficult to determine whether the person , at the time of mak

ing the statement , thought that his statement was true, This law places an onus on the accused to prove that he actually though that the statement was true at the time. ( although this onus may be unconstitutional) What does the state have to prove Difference between statutory perjury and common law perjury.

• X has on two different occasions made a two statements under oath . • That the statements are in conflict with each other. Common law perjury Statutory Perjury • • •

Only one statement is involved Only committed in the course of a legal proceeding.

•

•

Two statements which are contradicting each other is involved. Neither of the statements need to be made in the course of a legal

proceeding although usually at least one is made during the legal proceedings....