S v Mei

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Court: Orange Free State Provincial Division
• Judge: Flemming J and Viljoen AJ
• Judgment Date: 08 October 1981
• Citation: 1982 (1) SA 299 (O)
• Hearing Date: 14 September 1981

S v Mei
1982 (1) SA 299 (O)

1982 (1) SA p299

Citation	1982 (1) SA 299 (O)
Court	Orange Free State Provincial Division
Judge	Flemming J and Viljoen AJ
Heard	September 14, 1981
Judgment	October 8, 1981

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

Criminal law — Public violence — Nature of violence required — Mere H placing of stones on road not amounting to — Group of people there — Only appellant having thrown a stone — No evidence that group of people congregated there had such common intention — Nothing in charge or evidence to establish appellant threw stone with intent to damage complainants' vehicle nor indeed that it was damaged — Conviction of lesser offence of malicious injury to property also not possible.

Criminal procedure — Verdict — Conviction of lesser offence in terms of s 270 of Act 51 of 1977 — When competent.

1982 (1) SA p300

Headnote : Kopnota

Violence, whether by action or, at least, threat, is still required to be proved before an accused can be convicted of public violence.

A In an appeal from a conviction of public violence, it appeared that the evidence disclosed that between 15 and 30 people, of whom appellant had been one, had assembled at a place where the road had been obstructed by stones. Appellant had thrown a stone at the complainants' vehicle. The complainants, policemen on duty, had thereupon chased and caught the appellant. The entire group had fled when the vehicle stopped and the only stone thrown before that had been the one thrown by appellant.

B Held, that the mere placing of stones in the road did not amount to violence.

Held, further, as the evidence fell short of establishing that the group of people present at the scene had as their object the stoning of vehicles stopped by the barricade, that the element of the crime which required that a number of people should have acted in concert to commit public violence was absent.

C Held, further, as the charge sheet did not contain and the evidence did not support any allegation that stones had been thrown with the intention of damaging the vehicle, nor indeed that the vehicle had been damaged, that the appellant also could not be convicted of the lesser offence of malicious injury to property.

Semble: There is much to be said for the view that the wording of s 270 D of Act 51 of 1977 bears the meaning that, as long as the 'essential elements' of the lesser offence are included in 'the offence so charged', ie in the charge sheet, not the legal definition of the crime, a finding of guilt on the lesser crime is competent. E

Case Information

Application for condonation of the late noting of an appeal and an appeal. The facts appear from the reasons for judgment.

M Basslian for the appellant.

J J du Toit for the State.

Cur adv vult.

Postea (October 8). F

Judgment

Flemming J:

I agree with the judgment of my Colleague except to the G extent to which it may be understood to take the view that stoning a vehicle will necessarily provide the requisite 'violence' or that lying down in a street is never capable of amounting to a threat of violence (if a threat of violence can legally be adequate for the purposes of the crime). As at present advised, I can imagine circumstances wherein such generalisations would prove to be inaccurate. For the purposes of this H case it is not necessary to decide whether my prima facie view is correct. I accordingly refrain from deciding that question.

Judgment

Viljoen AJ:

Appellant was charged with and found guilty of public violence in the Bloemfontein magistrate's court. He was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. Because his notice of appeal was filed out of time appellant requires condonation for such late filing and a substantive application to that effect was made. While the affidavit...