3 (the CPA) and was argued on that basis. It concerns the question whether imputing consent to a sexual act (defined as rape) by a child under the age of 12 years for purposes of sentence is competent. [2] The respondent, Mr Morne Grobler, was arraigned in the regional court on the following seven charges: (a) three counts of rape in contravention of s 3 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 1997 (the Sexual Offences Act); (b) using a child for child pornography in contravention of s 20(1) of the Sexual Offences Act (count 4); (c) exposing, displaying or causing the exposure or displaying of child pornography in contravention of s 19(a) of the Sexual Offences Act (count 5); (d) sexual grooming of children in contravention of s 18(2)(a) of the Act (count 6); and (e) possession of a film or publication containing child pornography in contravention of s 27(1)(a)(i) of the Films and Publications Act 65 of 1996 (the Films Act) (count 7). In the regional court, he pleaded not guilty to all seven counts. [3] Briefly, the background to which the charges relate is as follows. The respondent and the complainant’s mother, AG, married each other during September 2006. The complainant, CC, who was ten years old at the time, and her younger brother, TT, lived with the respondent and their mother at the Air Force Base in Louis Trichardt. The complainant and her brother were AG’s children from a previous relationship. All of the offences in respect of which the respondent was charged were alleged to have been committed during the period spanning from September to November 2009 at the family home on various occasions when the complainant’s mother was not at home. The allegations against the respondent, broadly stated, were that on various occasions during this period, the respondent, unlawfully and intentionally, penetrated the complainant’s vagina, anus and mouth with his penis. And that he took photographs of the sexual acts with his cellular phone, thus creating pornographic material, and transferred and stored these on the family computer. It was also alleged that he had shown the complainant pornographic images of him and her mother having sex, and that he sexually groomed the complainant. [4] The complainant’s mother testified at the trial that on the morning of 2 November 2009 whilst she was scrolling through the family computer she came