A statement had been made by the accused to a peace officer without compliance with the formalities prescribed by section 273(1) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act.[2]
Judgmentedit
That statement, the court found, although it was capable of implying an admission of guilt, was also capable of a rational explanation, which did not include any such admission. The court held, therefore, that the statement was not a confession within the meaning of the section.
viljoen, important, case, south, african, heard, appellate, division, april, 1941, with, judgment, handed, down, watermeyer, tindall, centlivres, feetham, presided, contents, facts, judgment, also, references, case, legislation, notesfacts, edita, statement, b. R v Viljoen 1 is an important case in South African law It was heard in the Appellate Division on 23 April 1941 with judgment handed down on 6 May De Wet CJ Watermeyer JA Tindall JA Centlivres JA and Feetham JA presided Contents 1 Facts 2 Judgment 3 See also 4 References 4 1 Case law 4 2 Legislation 5 NotesFacts editA statement had been made by the accused to a peace officer without compliance with the formalities prescribed by section 273 1 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act 2 Judgment editThat statement the court found although it was capable of implying an admission of guilt was also capable of a rational explanation which did not include any such admission The court held therefore that the statement was not a confession within the meaning of the section See also editConfession law Crime in South Africa Evidence law Law of South Africa South African criminal law South African criminal procedureReferences editCase law edit R v Viljoen 1941 AD 366 Legislation edit Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act 31 of 1917 Notes edit 1941 AD 366 31 of 1917 nbsp This article relating to case law in South Africa is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title R v Viljoen amp oldid 1110671606, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
