Rex v Geshen and Miller Appellants
Jurisdiction | South Africa |
Judge | Wessels CJ, Curlewis JA, Stratford JA, Beyers JA and De Villiers JA |
Judgment Date | 06 March 1933 |
Citation | 1933 AD 137 |
Hearing Date | 04 March 1933 |
Court | Appellate Division |
Wessels, C.J.:
In this case five persons, including the two appellants were charged with attempted housebreaking with intent to steal, the details of the indictment being as follows: "In that, upon or about the 7th November, 1932, and at or near Johannesburg the said Sam Geshen and the said Phillip Miller, both or one or other of them did wrongfully and unlawfully incite, instigate, command or procure the said Nicolaas Stephen Kruger the said Johannes Kruger and the said Stephanus Johannes Kruger, to break and enter the storeroom of W. F. Brittain, a merchant there carrying on business, with intent the goods there being to steal, and whereas the said Nicolaas Stephen Kruger, the said Johannes Kruger and the said Stephanus Johannes Kruger in consequence of the said inciting instigating, commanding or procuring did, all or one or more of them wrongfully and unlawfully attempt to break and enter the said storeroom with the intent aforesaid, the accused are, all or one or more of them, guilty of the crime of attempted housebreaking with intent to steal."
There was a certain Paulsen, one of the persons engaged, who turned King's evidence and at the trial related that he and all the accused had met together and had discussed the breaking in and stealing of fountain pens belonging to Brittain. Geshen and Miller were to take over the pens, which would be sold, by them and the proceeds divided amongst them all.
It is contended that there is no evidence to justify the conviction on the indictment as framed because the evidence of Paulsen was to the effect that the matter was already ripe before these two participants arrived on the scene and therefore there could not have been any inciting or instigation or commanding or procuring by them. The simple answer to this is that, if two or more person's
Wessels...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Rex v Fourie and Another Appellants
...to the accused. An incitement precedes all overt acts; it merges, in the attempt when the attempt is made. See Rex v Geshen & Miller (1933 AD 137). Impossibility of accomplishment is, generally speaking, a defence in charges based on attempts to commit a crime, where the thing attempted is,......
-
S v Mbele and Others
...decision that sec. 257 had no application by contending that the two cases relied upon by him had support from Rex v Geshen and Miller, 1933 AD 137. In that case five persons, including the two appellants, had been charged before a E Superior Court with attempted housebreaking with intent t......
-
Scottish Union & National Insurance Co Ltd v Native Recruiting Corporation Ltd
...the literal construction may conceivably on occasion operate harshly on him. He must show absurdity or incongruity. Cohen v Rapidol Ltd. (1933 AD 137), is authority for the proposition that if to imply a condition in a written contract would create a hardship on one party, then it cannot be......
-
S v Mbele and Others
...decision that sec. 257 had no application by contending that the two cases relied upon by him had support from Rex v Geshen and Miller, 1933 AD 137. In that case five persons, including the two appellants, had been charged before a E Superior Court with attempted housebreaking with intent t......
-
Rex v Fourie and Another Appellants
...to the accused. An incitement precedes all overt acts; it merges, in the attempt when the attempt is made. See Rex v Geshen & Miller (1933 AD 137). Impossibility of accomplishment is, generally speaking, a defence in charges based on attempts to commit a crime, where the thing attempted is,......
-
S v Mbele and Others
...decision that sec. 257 had no application by contending that the two cases relied upon by him had support from Rex v Geshen and Miller, 1933 AD 137. In that case five persons, including the two appellants, had been charged before a E Superior Court with attempted housebreaking with intent t......
-
Scottish Union & National Insurance Co Ltd v Native Recruiting Corporation Ltd
...the literal construction may conceivably on occasion operate harshly on him. He must show absurdity or incongruity. Cohen v Rapidol Ltd. (1933 AD 137), is authority for the proposition that if to imply a condition in a written contract would create a hardship on one party, then it cannot be......
-
S v Mbele and Others
...decision that sec. 257 had no application by contending that the two cases relied upon by him had support from Rex v Geshen and Miller, 1933 AD 137. In that case five persons, including the two appellants, had been charged before a E Superior Court with attempted housebreaking with intent t......