STUDENT NO. 218061910
TUTOR. Mrs V. KHUBEKAMODULE. INL100
1676400539115TASK. ASSIGNMENT 4
Why offenders are punished?
Rehabilitate or reform
The offenders are punished so that they can rehabilitate or reform. To develop in psychology and psychiatry that led to optimism about the possibility of the treatment and re-integration of offenders in society.
Imposing a penalty for a criminal act is also intended to deter offender from repeating the act
If the penalty is significant enough, the law breaker will think twice before doing it again.
Deterrence is frequently an argument used to support the death penalty.
A prison sentence is a direct form of prevention, for the duration of the offenders removal from the community, also the death penalty where the offender will not ever again commit crime again
A crime is considered as an act that not only harm the specific victim but also harms society. This gives rise to a desire for revenge, and punishing the criminal tends to satisfy that need. Having a person punished by society provides some measure of revenge for the specific victim of the act.
Sentencing can be directed at resolving the conflict between the victim and the offender. It is acknowledged that a victim’s right to recover damages through civil procedure is often of little comfort.
After the prosecutor has put the contents of the charge sheet to the accused she must plead which means she must either admits that she is guilty nor she must denies which means not guilty.
If the accused plead guilty, she may be found guilty immediately
If the offense is more serious the court cannot accept the accused’s offhand. The court must first ask whether the accused understands all the elements of the offense and really wants to plead guilty. This is important as some people do not understands the law
The plea of not guilty, the accused is given an opportunity to give an explanation of plea, but she is not bound to do so. The aim of this is to identity the issues in dispute. This will show the elements which the accused admits and which are disputed.
Is based on direct observations of the facts of the case, for example the evidence of an eyewitness who testifies that he saw A shoot B with a rifle.
Concerning circumstances from which the court can merely draw an inference concerning the facts of the case, for example the witness testifies that A’s rifle was found near B’s body. This evidence is admissible but does not carry much weight as direct evidence.
There are some instances whereby a person is not competent to testify because such evidence is privileged.
Private privilege – whereby a private interest is protected for example legal professional privilege. This is where a legal practitioner may not testify against his client about the client’s communications to him in his professional capacity.
Marital privilege – communication between spouses during their marriage are privilege, but there are some instances where spouses can be compelled to testify against each other in criminal cases such as where a spouse is charged with bigamy, incest, or kidnapping.
Privilege against self-incrimination – means that a witness is not compelled to answer a question in court if it will appear from the court that the witness has committed a crime for which he can be prosecuted.
Public privilege – the purpose of this privilege is to protect the public interest. The state cannot be compelled to furnish evidence in court on sensitive issues such as state security and international relations.
5.1 Opinion evidence
This evidence is inadmissible because it is the court task and not that of the witness, to decide on the facts.
It is inadmissible because the witness has not personally observed. He testifies about something which he heard from others who themselves are not witnesses in court.
The principles of natural justice rules
Audi alteram partem
Nemo iudex in sua causa