Crazy Law

Crazy Law Welcome to my corner of the digital world! QUESTIONS - 2011

Where did you grow up? I attended primary schools in several towns all over South Africa. Yes.

This page is a reflection of who I am—a writer crafting stories, a social media creator connecting with audiences, and a dedicated sportsperson passionate about discipline and teamwork. These towns include Worcester, Riversdale, Groblersdal, Witsieshoek, and Kestell. I attended Harrismith High school for the whole term of my high school. What did you study in order to qualify for your current posi

tion? I studied at UNISA from 1985 to 1994 obtaining the degrees B.Iuris and LL.B

Tell me about your business. What is your role? I am a non-practicing attorney – giving free legal advice. You worked as a government lawyer in South Africa for many years. Did this provide you with valuable experience in the field? I worked 14 years for the Department of Justice as a prosecutor and legal administration officer (Advocate) As Advocate part of my duty was to give the Director-General and the Minister of Justice legal advice on various types of matters, including advice on legislation, regulations and civil and criminal legal questions. Was it difficult for you to transition from the South African to the British legal system? Not at all. The systems are very similar. Was it difficult to establish yourself as a South African in a UK market? I completed my bridging exams and worked for other UK firms over a period of 3 years doing various types of legal work. I have established my own firm and have taken every instruction seriously. I do all relevant research properly to be able to assist each and every client appropriately. I sincerely believe that if you put in hard work you will reap the results. Why did you decide to return to South Africa? I had my own law firm in South Africa doing mainly personal injury cases. I sold my business after being advised by the Law Society that the Government was going to change legislation making it unprofitable to do this type of law. I decided to relocate to the UK to broaden my legal experience. I have returned to South Africa after about 9 years. I have gained a lot of UK experience, working both for the Government and the Private Sector. I missed my country. What is your vision for your company? I want to be known for offering free legal advice. No one should suffer because they do not have the means to afford a lawyer. What’s the most important lesson you have learnt about business? Never count your chickens until they have hatched. INDEMNITY
The contents of the webpage are for people and organisations who are looking for free legal advice. The information on this webpage is subject to debate, completion and modification and you should not rely on the contents of this webpage. I make no representations as to the correctness or completeness of the contents of the webpage;
I Accept no liability if you make any decision which turn out to be wrong or use a form or information which are wrong and is based on the contents of the webpage;
I shall not be liable for any damage or loss arising from or otherwise in connection with your use of my webpage;
I do not warrant that functions available on this webpage will be uninterrupted or error free, or that faults will be rectified, or that the server that makes it available is free of hacking, fishing, viruses or bugs. You acknowledge that it is your responsibility to implement inter alia sufficient procedures and virus checks to satisfy your particular requirements for privacy and the accuracy of data input and output. The meaning of the word webpage in the above context is wide and also refers to a website. Anthonie Van Bosch

07/06/2026
07/06/2026

Can an Online Insult Send You to Jail?

Can a severe insult or cyber-abuse land you in prison? Discover how South Africa’s unique law of Crimen Injuria protects human dignity.

In this video, we break down the legal powerhouse known as Crimen Injuria—South Africa's constitutional defense of personal dignity and privacy. Originally adapted from ancient Roman law to address face-to-face insults, this powerful legal concept has evolved to fight modern digital crises like revenge p**n, cyber-bullying, and viral racism.

We compare Crimen Injuria to Defamation, explore real-world benchmark cases (including the landmark Vicki Momberg and Penny Sparrow rulings), and examine how newer legislation like the Cybercrimes Act of 2020 and the Hate Crimes Act of 2023 patch the legal system for the internet era.

🔔 Subscribe for more deep dives into global legal systems and digital rights!

🕒 CHAPTERS

00:00 - Jail For Insults?

00:06 - What Is Crimen Injuria?

00:21 - Words as a Legal Assault

00:33 - The Origin of Dignity Law

00:49 - Crimen Injuria vs. Defamation

01:00 - The Three-Level Crime Checklist

01:18 - The Two-Way Glass Test

01:31 - Beyond Words: The Right to Privacy

01:43 - Freedom of Speech vs. Human Dignity

01:57 - Real World Case: The Racist Rant

02:11 - The Digital Crisis: Group Harm

02:27 - Patching the Legal System

02:45 - The Diagnostic Matrix Summary

02:59 - The Digital Golden Rule

Mainly used to capture broader search intents and common user spelling errors.
Core Keywords: Crimen Injuria, South African Law, Human Dignity, Cybercrimes Act, Defamation vs Crimen Injuria, Right to Privacy, Digital Abuse Law, Hate Crimes Act South Africa.

Crime Injuria, Crimen Injuree-ah, South Africa law, Cyber crimes act, Vicki Momburg case.

07/06/2026

The Stanford Law Study: Is AI Replacing Lawyers?

In this video, we break down the shocking Stanford Law study where Gemini 2.5 Pro and NotebookLM went head-to-head with top law professors. Discover why AI won a 75% win rate, and the exact human skill it's completely missing.

Who wins the ultimate knowledge worker battle? A recent double-blind Stanford study pitted generative AI against 16 human law professors across 40 complex contract law questions.

While the AI achieved a staggering 75% win rate and proved to be significantly safer and less likely to mislead students, a parallel study exposed "The Issue-Spotting Blindspot." When handed unprompted, raw fact patterns, the AI failed entirely.

Watch to learn about the changing Capability Spectrum, why AI isn't replacing the professional (it's replacing the process), and how you can become an "Augmented Expert" by mastering diagnosis, prompting, and verification.

[Timestamps / Chapters]

00:00 - AI Beats Professors? The Ultimate Showdown

00:16 - The Double-Blind Law Study Explained

00:43 - The Verdict: 75% AI Win Rate

01:13 - Unveiling the Risk of Human Error

01:24 - The Fundamental Flaw of Generative AI

01:36 - Cracking the Issue-Spotting Blindspot

01:51 - Mapping the Legal Capability Spectrum

02:05 - Institutional Triage: The Future of Law Schools

02:20 - Redefining the Ultimate Knowledge Worker

03:00 - Elevate Your Perspective on AI Collaboration

🔗 Links: https://storm.genie.stanford.edu/

🔔 Subscribe: If you want to stay ahead of the AI curve and maximize your workflow, subscribe to the channel!

💬 Community Question: Do you think AI will eventually overcome the "issue-spotting" blindspot, or will humans always need to steer the engine? Let me know in the comments!

Stanford law AI study, Gemini 2.5 Pro legal, NotebookLM law, AI vs lawyers, future of knowledge work, legal tech 2026, AI issue spotting, Berkeley law AI policy, AI professional contract law, generative AI reasoning, augmented expert, Stanford AI study, legal reasoning engine, Fegma, Gemini law study, AI lawyer mistake.

02/06/2026

Reverse-Engineering the AI Ethics Judge Protocol .

How does artificial intelligence grade the ethics of a Supreme Court decision? In this diagnostic breakdown, we run the 2026 New Zealand Supreme Court case—UV Limited v AB Limited—through our AI Ethics Analyzer Protocol to evaluate legal compliance, integrity, and moral reasoning.

If you want to understand the future of algorithmic oversight in high-stakes legal battles, watch this complete analysis.

👇 SUBSCRIBE for more deep dives into legal tech and AI ethics!

📊 WHAT WE COVER IN THIS VIDEO:

* The core tension between Open Justice and the right to privacy in a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme case.
* Diagnostic 1 & 3: Why Legal Ethics and Legality scored a near-perfect 99/100.
* Diagnostic 2: How the court exposed a fatal flaw in the suppression request to score a 96 in Integrity.
* Diagnostic 4: The Moral Compass breakdown and the friction of pro-social intent.
* Final Output: The system synthesis threading the ethical needle without triggering "critical concern" flags.

🛠️ RESOURCES & LINKS:

Full Court Judgment Case File:https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/cases/2026/2026-NZSC-31.pdf

TIMESTAMPS:

00:00 - AI Judges Law! Introduction An introduction to the AI Ethics Judge system and a quick setup of the upcoming case study.

00:19 - Calibrating the Ethics Analyser A breakdown of the scoring bands, critical concern thresholds, and protocol functions.

00:36 - System Calibration Matrix: The 4 Dimensions An overview of how Legal Ethics, Integrity, Legality, and the Moral Compass are weighted.

00:51 - Reverse-Engineering the Visual Prompt A behind-the-scenes look at the aesthetic choices, composition, and lighting used for the analog meter.

01:04 - Loading Case Data: UV Limited v AB Limited [2026] An overview of the multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme and the legal tension surrounding open justice versus privacy.

01:16 - Diagnostic 1: Legal Ethics Assessment An analysis of the court's duty of care and compliance with regulations, scoring 99/100.

01:28 - Diagnostic 2: Integrity & Transparency Check Evaluating the public availability of information and truthfulness, scoring 96/100.

01:43 - Diagnostic 3: Statutory Legality Review A deep dive into how the Senior Courts Act and Criminal Procedure Act were applied, scoring 99/100.

01:54 - Diagnostic 4: Moral Compass & Public Interest Weighing individual financial reputations against the collective good of victim recovery, scoring 85/100.

02:08 - System Synthesis & Final Output The final compilation of metrics confirming that open justice was protected without triggering critical flags.

02:23 - Next Steps & Operator Action Required A prompt for the user to select follow-up options, ranging from adjusting scores to extending the analysis.


AI Ethics Judge, UV Limited v AB Limited, New Zealand Supreme Court 2026, algorithmic oversight, legal tech analytics, automated judicial panel, open justice vs privacy, ethics analyzer protocol, legal ethics diagnostic, Ponzi scheme litigation, legal AI software, AI court decision, AI Judge, AIEthics, LegalTech

Address

Moorreesburg

Telephone

0769818095

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Crazy Law posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category