Cradlestone just robbed

[dunkyd]

Less guns , more half bright people on CCTV , better car exit control ( auto spikes)

 

[rwenzori]

Buy a camera, do the paperwork, payment and leave the store at 17:55. The doors are closed as you leave. In less than 3 minutes later shots ring out, there is chaos all over, people screaming, running.

I am glad you and your family are OK.

 

[reactor_sa]

It's just not safe anywhere in SA; not at the malls, at home, on the roads, in the hospitals.... Crime has really rocketed in the last few months

 

[strego]

SA is a criminal's paradise!
Lot's to steal and easy to get away with it.

 

[Africaner]

More civilians should carry guns. Not only carry but know how to use them. Unfortunately, two chaps with which I used to be in the school, are now sitting for armed robbery. I still visit them in the prison now and then. Their social situation is a complicated one. Yes, in the end they should have not committed the crime but not all robberies are the same. There are many reasons why people end up in a vicious circle which leads to (violent) crime. When I asked if they would have still committed the robbery if they knew the people on the premises are armed, they said: no. They don't want to get killed. They would have looked for something easier to rob. I hate guns but guns might be a solution.

 

[The_Mowgs]

You in a armed robbery and you have your firearm. You see them pointing guns but not shooting. You pull out your gun and they start shooting and some innocent person gets killed by them. You unfortunately will be charged with murder first off and sit in courts for years to come. You might not end up being sentenced with murder but if you get a d@@s of a detective and NPA official that's the reality. Oh and you sit without a firearm till found innocent or perhaps forever.

Unless there are max 2 with only handguns and their backs are towards you and someone's life is definitely in danger you probably don't stand a chance unless you have special training and a marksman shot.
Sometimes it's best to accept and hope no one gets injured but if the shyte is really going down well no options.

Actually, you will not be charged with murder, even if you by accident shoot and kill more people, the criminals will be charged with those murders...

 

[Hemi300c]

Actually, you will not be charged with murder, even if you by accident shoot and kill more people, the criminals will be charged with those murders...

Not quite you will be seen as the cause of the death. This was confirmed by a colonel in our CPF.

 

[The_Mowgs]

Tell him he is talking **** and knows nothing of the law please.
Go and read the laws and outcomes of previous cases in SA

 

[House]

Tell him he is talking **** and knows nothing of the law please.
Go and read the laws and outcomes of previous cases in SA

You are wrong.

Firstly, the person who fired the shots will be charged for murder. There is a big possibility that the NPA will refuse to institute prosecution though. But, in the slight event they do, you will need to go to court and face charges. There are different forms of intention the court will take into consideration, and if the court feels that your actions fall under one of them, you can be convicted - for example, you are in a shopping mall, there are many people around. Dolus Eventualis (meaning that you should have foreseen that your actions could lead to the death of an innocent bystander) can end you up in jail - not for life, but probably 5-10 years.

Secondly, the courts will not charge the robbers with murder, there is not a single case where this has happened and a successful conviction obtained. They cannot be held responsible for the actions of a third party who intervenes and shoots at them. Our law does not allow these prosecutions.

 

[The_Mowgs]

How can you be charged with murder? Being charged with murder means your intent was to kill a specific person?

You could be INVESTIGATED for manslaughter but not murder.

 

[House]

How can you be charged with murder? Being charged with murder means your intent was to kill a specific person?

You could be INVESTIGATED for manslaughter but not murder.

You need to look at the elements of the crime. One of the elements are intention. Then you have different forms of intention, like I said earlier, dolus directus, dolus eventualist, etc. Once all the elements of the crime has been proven, then you can be convicted on murder.

In the example you used, and in this case, there is a shopping center with a large number of people. You know that by firing a fire-arm at robbers, you may miss and hit an innocent by-stander. Despite this, you still go ahead and shoot at the robbers. Now, you really miss a shot and the stray bullet hits a by-stander killing him/her.

Before the NPA decides to institute prosecution, they will look at all circumstances. Could you have done things in another way, could you have moved to a position to prevent someone else from getting killed or injured. If they do find that you could not have done things in another way under the circumstances, they are likely not to institute prosecution, but if they are of the opinion that you did not need to shoot or you could have moved to another position - and you didn't, then they can charge you for murder.

Like I said, they can also convict you simply based on the dolus eventualis intent. The fact that you knew that your actions could have lead (and in this case did lead) to the death of another.

It happened before, and in fact, there are case law and precedent cases confirming this.

Download this PDF file, which is a case that went on appeal - http://www.justice.gov.za/sca/judgments/sca_2013/sca2013-034.pdf

Here you will see what I mean. It deals with discharging firearm fully aware and reckless of the danger posed to those in vicinity and deceased in particular. The guy lost his appeal and was convicted on murder.

 

[Nerfherder]

How can you be charged with murder? Being charged with murder means your intent was to kill a specific person?

You could be INVESTIGATED for manslaughter but not murder.

You shot and killed an innocent person

That's murder. You are a hazard to society if you think otherwise.

 

[medicnick83]

It's that time of the year!

 

[The_Mowgs]

Please go and read the defenition of the word murder before making a fool of yourself, or stop commenting.

 

[HDS]

You shot and killed an innocent person

That's murder. You are a hazard to society if you think otherwise.

Wouldn't it count as involuntary manslaughter? Since murder implies premeditation.

 

[The_Mowgs]

Wouldn't it count as involuntary manslaughter? Since murder implies premeditation.

No no no its murder. Playing cricket outside with your children and the ball hits someone's windscreen which causes them to have such a fright that the lose control of their vehicle, crashes and dies will be murder!

 

[The_Mowgs]

You need to look at the elements of the crime. One of the elements are intention. Then you have different forms of intention, like I said earlier, dolus directus, dolus eventualist, etc. Once all the elements of the crime has been proven, then you can be convicted on murder.

In the example you used, and in this case, there is a shopping center with a large number of people. You know that by firing a fire-arm at robbers, you may miss and hit an innocent by-stander. Despite this, you still go ahead and shoot at the robbers. Now, you really miss a shot and the stray bullet hits a by-stander killing him/her.

Before the NPA decides to institute prosecution, they will look at all circumstances. Could you have done things in another way, could you have moved to a position to prevent someone else from getting killed or injured. If they do find that you could not have done things in another way under the circumstances, they are likely not to institute prosecution, but if they are of the opinion that you did not need to shoot or you could have moved to another position - and you didn't, then they can charge you for murder.

Like I said, they can also convict you simply based on the dolus eventualis intent. The fact that you knew that your actions could have lead (and in this case did lead) to the death of another.

It happened before, and in fact, there are case law and precedent cases confirming this.

Download this PDF file, which is a case that went on appeal - http://www.justice.gov.za/sca/judgments/sca_2013/sca2013-034.pdf

Here you will see what I mean. It deals with discharging firearm fully aware and reckless of the danger posed to those in vicinity and deceased in particular. The guy lost his appeal and was convicted on murder.

Thanks for the PDF but would it still be the same when you LAWFULLY DEFENDED yourself? Not UNlawfully discharging a FA which might cause death?

The case which you provided indicates that the first act was unlawfull.

 

[Dolby]

I haven't checked the dates of all these robberies - but guess they're all in the week?

 

[MickeyD]

Thanks for the PDF but would it still be the same when you LAWFULLY DEFENDED yourself? Not UNlawfully discharging a FA which might cause death?

The case which you provided indicates that the first act was unlawfull.

How are you lawfully defending YOURSELF in this instance?

The robbers, though armed, are not shooting at you or your family so your life is not in danger.

Then you, as an innocent bystander, take it upon yourself to discharge your firearm, you miss your intended target and kill another innocent bystander...

 

[CAPS LOCK]

Tell him he is talking **** and knows nothing of the law please.
Go and read the laws and outcomes of previous cases in SA

How can you be charged with murder? Being charged with murder means your intent was to kill a specific person?

You could be INVESTIGATED for manslaughter but not murder.

Please go and read the defenition of the word murder before making a fool of yourself, or stop commenting.

Your interpretation of the Law and commentary on it is reckless...not because of what you conclude is necessarily incorrect, but because your reasoning severely lacks legal insight...