Topic 3.5 Flashcards
(11 cards)
What is Aberrattio Ictus?
Aberratio Ictus meas going astray of the blow. Its instances where consequence turn out to be different from what the accused expected. Something happens which is different to what was intended, due to something going wrong, such as the blow going stray.
How is aberratio ictus defined S v Mtshiza?
S v Mtshiza the court stated that the Aberratio Ictus is no more than a convenient latin expression that descirbes a stituaion where a blow aimed at A misses him and lands on B.
What was held in R v Koza?
R v Koza, established the principle that where the accused intended to kill one person but in fact killed another, the accused is guilty of murder without the prosecution having to prove that the accused specifically intended to kill that other person, it applied the versari doctrine.
What is the general rule in aberratio Ictus?
The intention in respect of the intended target IS NOT IMPUTED or TRANSFERRED to the actual victim (Bernardus abolished versari). The regular (concrete intent) approach to fault is used to determine fault in respect of the actual victim (Tissen, Raisa, Mavhungu).
What was held in S v Mtshiza?
In S v Mtshiza held that unless we prove intention through culpa or dolus in respect to the particular person who died there can be no conviction. This shows that the mens rea and actus rea must be contemporaneous
What are the facts S v Tissen?
In S v Tissen case, the accused had shoot at a particular person on a busy street intending to kill him, the bullet rickocheted off the street and injured a passer byer. The acused was charged with intent to murder in respect of the intended victim and assult in respect to the actual victim.
What was held S v Tissen?
It was held that ths is an example of aberratio ictus and he could be charged with assault as he forsaw that he might hit someone other than his intended victim and he reconciled himsefl with that eventuality.
What are the facts in S v Raisa?
In S v Raisa case, a women was being attacked by the accused with a knife and she was holding a child and used the child as a human shield. The acucsed then stabbed the child instead of the women, neither died. The accused was charged wth assult with the intent to cause aggravated harm.
What was held in S v Raisa case?
It was held that in respect of the child there is aberratio ictus and that the conviction can be sustained if the accused admitted to harming the child or admitting to forseen that the child would come between the women. This was not inferred as the only inference through the facts that he coud have foreseen this possibility.
What are the facts in S v Mavhungu?
In S v Mavhungu case, the accused conspired with a some people to kill her mother in law. The plan was that the accused and his friends would enter the house at night and kill her. On the day the accused arrived late and the deed had already been done, but the person they killed was not the mother in law.
What is held in S v Mavhungu?
It was held that it was not a true instance of arbiatio ictus but more of a mistake of fact. But even if the accused had argued mistake of fact, she would still be held liable for murder as she planned and consipred to kill a human being and a human being as dead.
