INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES CRIMINAL LAW EXAMINER S REPORT AUTUMN 2007
|
|
- Cleopatra Walters
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Subject 23 INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES CRIMINAL LAW EXAMINER S REPORT AUTUMN 2007 Comments on Overall performance There were some very good responses to some of the questions, but the standard of exam performance was mixed. The issue of poor time management affected candidates performance. It was not unusual for candidates to leave too little time for the fourth question, or even not do a fourth question at all. Pleasingly, the allocation of the burden of proof (Woolmington) was rarely mistaken. There were, however, centres where all candidates failed, and where scripts contained no, or very little, relevant case law. General Advice to Candidates In your revision, learn the law AND the relevant authority AT THE SAME TIME. Let the cases guide your knowledge and understanding. It is hard work, but find time to practise writing exam question answers in timed conditions to reflect on what you can write (and how well) in a mere 45 minutes. If you then mark it yourself, a few days later, you will learn a lot about your exam technique (use these examiner s reports too). Underline case names please. Question 1 PART A (a) (i) Section 18. The actus reus should be established quickly. X has caused (the question makes this clear) really serious harm (Smith) and HIV+ was confirmed in Dica to be sufficiently serious. The mens rea is less likely though. X s lies to Y may affect her capacity to give informed consent to sex (Dica) but are unlikely to mean he aimed for her to get HIV+. Even if we were to use Woollin (and its application outside murder is, of course, moot), it is unclear that he foresaw causing GBH as a virtually certain outcome. If the actus reus and mens rea were proved, however, the fact that Y consented to sex is irrelevant to liability - consent is no defence to intentional harm s. 18 (Dica and Brown). (ii) Section 20. The actus reus is given as above; and the mens rea is not difficult to prove from the evidence. He has been warned to use condoms and inform his sexual partners. Failure to do so must surely mean he foresaw some harm Page 1 of 8
2 ( maliciously, Mowatt) might occur. Uninformed consent is no consent. Dica is the key case here and according to the Court of Appeal, the law centres around knowledge. Knowledge and consent are not synonymous, but consent without knowledge is unlikely to be valid. According to Mukadi as well, Y clearly did not consent to the risks associated with unprotected sexual intercourse, and X is therefore liable. (iii) Section 47. Even though liability for section 20 has been found, the question asks for an examination of section 47 as well. In order to succeed on this charge, the prosecution would have to prove that there was an assault (by battery) occasioning (which is given) and ABH (which is also given; if it is GBH, it is at least ABH, Miller, Brown). The question will be whether X intended to apply or was reckless in the application of force (Venna) which was unlawful. There is no case law exactly on point here. On the one hand, Brown says a person cannot consent to ABH, but does that mean there is a battery or not? One case may assist; Tabassum (the case where D touched women s breasts) where the notable feature was the quality of the act as opposed to its nature. By analogy, therefore, the failure to inform Y of his HIV+ status may change the act of sex, to sex of a different quality in law, and it there may therefore be a battery. (b) In the alternative. The section 18 outcome would not change. Whether the actus reus and mens rea have been established or not, Dica provides consent is no defence. What would change, however, is the outcome in sections 20 and 47; a person can, according to Dica (but not Brown) consent to the risk of infection even with a disease as serious as HIV+ provided the person is informed of the risks. Some analysis between the conflict in the authorities was expected. Surprisingly few students mentioned consent at all. This meant those students did not identify the main issue in the question. The time and effort put into revising the actus reus and mens rea of the sections was time wasted. Consent is a very important area of law and students cannot simply learn Brown, and may be Wilson, and expect to do well. Dica has been around for long enough that students should be well aware of the judgment and its effect. The question was broken into 4 parts. The answers should also be broken into 4 parts. Most candidates did so; and it does assist us when we are marking. Question 2 The charge is murder. The actus reus is causing the death of a human being. The only issue was whether A was the cause of S s death. To be a cause, both the but for and the legal test must be used. But for A s act, S would not have died (cf. White) so A is the factual cause of death. In legal terms, provided his act was a more than nominal cause, it need not be the sole cause (Kimsey). This is established as the book spine hitting S on the head was a more than nominal contribution to death. Causation is then dependent on whether anything broke the chain. Page 2 of 8
3 First, was the tutor s inability to help a free, deliberate and informed act? Latif and Paggett suggest it might not be (she is a trained not a professional first aider) and even Empress Cars (recently of course restricted to its facts, see Kennedy HL) would suggest it is not unusual for a first-aid trained teacher to panic. This, therefore, would probably not break the chain of causation. The acts of K and L should be considered in light of the facts and decision in Smith, and clearly would not be sufficient to break the chain, but the doctor s negligence in misreading the scan might be viewed as so potent, independent etc. per Cheshire, Jordan that the chain of causation would be broken. Provided the law was well explained, it did not matter whether the student concluded it did or did not break the chain as this is a matter of fact, it therefore cannot be wrong. On these facts, turning off the life-support machines is not a break in the chain of causation, Malcherek. The mens rea of murder is intent to kill or intent to cause GBH (Moloney). GBH is defined as really serious harm. We are told that A intended to cause harm, but it unclear how much. If not serious harm, the charge of murder fails. If it is serious harm, then we must deal with the fact that A intended to cause M that harm, but the charge is murder of S. It is possible to transfer his mens rea from Mark to Sheila using Latimer. There is no question of oblique intent here. The marks given reflected the number of (relevant) causation cases explained and applied, and the ability to argue whether the mens rea was established and could be transferred. A full range of case-law on causation, however, appears not to be known. Most candidates know Smith, Jordan and Cheshire, but there was not much else. Failure to mention transferred malice (but not necessarily the cases) was rare, but it did prevent the high marks. One major error here was discussing manslaughter rather than murder. The question specifies the charge. Candidates ignore it at their peril! Another was to ignore the medical negligence causation cases (above). Three points must be emphasised: 1. Adomako is not a case about causation. It is the authority for gross negligence manslaughter. 2. Medical negligence may break the chain of causation, but it does not have to be Adomako negligence. 3. The doctor s liability was not asked for. Question 3 Theft is a given. The question actually specifies that R stole the cigarettes. That means theft does not have to be established. The question also states that P died and R intended to cause P serious harm (Moloney). Murder needs no further consideration. Page 3 of 8
4 Accordingly, the answer is on the likelihood of the defence of duress succeeding. First, was R compelled by D s threat to act as she did, and did she have good cause to fear death or GBH otherwise? Second, would a person of reasonable firmness have done the same thing (Martin, Howe, Hasan)? The threats that D would tell G about her nasty secret are almost certainly insufficient alone (Valderama-Vega), but what of the threat to her prettiness? This could certainly be regarded as a threat to cause GBH. A further issue arises; is the crime nominated (Cole)? Initially it seemed to be, but then R could have bought the cigarettes, rather than steal them. Better to be in debt, than commit a crime. The next issue is that of imminence/immediacy, which is one for the jury (Hudson and Taylor cf. Hussain, Hasan) but D does specific the next day. Finally, as D is a known violent criminal, the recent decision in Hasan works against R where some previous case law might have allowed her the defence; is her duress self-inflicted through her gambling addiction? If so, the defence fails. Finally, we must consider if there are relevant elements to apply to the objective test. Case law suggests that characteristics of pliancy and vulnerability (Horne, Hegarty) are not be relevant, but a recognised mental illness (R has only mild learning difficulties) might be, Bowen. Of course, as for the availability of the defence, she cannot plead duress to murder, Howe, and although it is available per se to theft, on the facts as stated it is unlikely to succeed. Candidates either spent far too long establishing the offences (which as can be seen here should be mentioned only briefly) or ruled out duress for R s association with D, a known criminal, and did not provide more than the most basic reasoning, briefly. The conclusion is not wrong in law, but in terms of exam technique, it is not best practice. To maximise marks, students must show knowledge and understanding across a range and to a depth. The marking was reasonably generous on the offences despite the question making it clear they were established, and we also gave some credit where there were only brief references to duress, but we had to ignore all other defences, especially insanity, which cropped up again and again with no hint of a disease of mind in the question. Question 4 Sunglasses A has appropriated (Morris, Gomez) the sunglasses which are property (tangible) belonging to another (the shop) and clearly has intention permanently to deprive (Velumyl). She is obviously Ghosh dishonest (if she weren t she would have paid full price!). A nice, straightforward theft started the question off. Page 4 of 8
5 Lipstick This is an appropriation as she has assumed a right of the owner. The lipstick is property and it also belongs to the shop. She must have intention permanently to deprive of the part used. There is the slimmest possibility of a section 2 (belief that the owner would consent), but that would work only if the lipstick was a sample, so this is not likely. She is Ghosh dishonest. This is theft. Necklace This is a case of theft by finding. The honest appropriation of property cannot be theft (explain section 2(1)(c)) but where a defendant later becomes dishonest (here where A sees the postcode and decides to keep the necklace anyway), section 3 of the Theft Act provides that a later appropriation of property, originally appropriated without being stolen, is appropriated where the defendant keeps the property or otherwise deals with it as owner. Overpayment The issue here is not whether there is an appropriation, as there clearly is per Gomez and Hinks, but whether the property belongs to another. The extra pay is in A s control (section 5(1)) so it cannot be stolen except for the provisions of section 5(4); property obtained by mistake is regarded as against her as belonging to the employer. Candidates were able to state the Ghosh test correctly and also applied it logically. The most common mistakes/omissions were a failure to consider section 2 on the necklace, and/or section 5 on the overpayment of the wages. Even where the Ghosh test was explained correctly and well applied, omitting both of these elements typically resulted in a mark of between 40-45, which we feel was often far lower than the student was capable of, had they learnt the whole topic of theft, not just Gomez on appropriation and Ghosh on dishonesty. Question 5 PART B The meaning of the word intention should be clear, but it is not. Where a defendant has a single aim or purpose, the word does not lead to jury confusion, but where the defendant has multiple aims or purposes, or perhaps a justifiable, or if not justifiable, understandable, motive, the jury may struggle to find intention. This is a reasonably straightforward question on the difference between direct and oblique intention, and the degree of foresight required where no direct intent (aim, purpose) can be found. Very strong students also considered whether the question is one of fact or law. Key authorities include Smith, section 8 CJA 1967, Hyam, Moloney, Hancock & Shankland, Nedrick, and of course Woollin. As Lord Steyn held the effect of the critical direction is that a result foreseen as a virtual certainty is an intended Page 5 of 8
6 result. Post-Woollin cases are expected as a matter of course including Re A and Matthews. Many candidates cannot define oblique intent and/or get the wrong decision in a particular case (for example by stating the ratio decidendi of Moloney was whether D foresaw the outcome as a virtual certainty ). Question 6 Only the first part of the title is correct. Duties can arise where, for example, in a relationship (Gibbins and Proctor), where the defendant assumes responsibility for another (Stone and Dobinson, Nicholls, Instan cf. Khan and Khan) or creates a dangerous situation (also called the supervening fault principle, Miller, Santa- Bermudez), but in none of these situations does liability depend on proof of endangering the general public. The second part of the title is only correct where criminal liability arises for failure to perform a contractual duty (Pittwood) and possibly where the duty arises out of a public office (Dytham). Candidates were able to list the categories of duty, and show a reasonable knowledge of the case facts. Too few considered the extent to which liability arises once a duty is found in law or where the failure to act endangers the public. Again, many candidates examined only the manslaughter cases and we repeat; there is more to omissions than manslaughter. Question 7 In essence, the Law Commission proposes there should be two main categories of homicide retaining the terms murder and manslaughter. Murder would, however, be split into two; murder in the first degree and murder in the second degree. This is described as the ladder of offences; murder 1 at the top rung, murder 2 in the middle, and manslaughter at the foot. Murder 1 will alone carry the mandatory sentence in the ladder, that of life imprisonment. It will be satisfied where a defendant kills with intent to kill, or with intent to cause serious injury where the defendant was aware of a serious risk of causing death. Murder 2 would be committed where; 1. the defendant kills with an intention to do serious injury; or 2. the defendant kills intending to cause some injury, or a fear of injury or a risk of injury, plus has an awareness of a serious risk of causing death; or Page 6 of 8
7 3. the defendant kills and the crime would be first degree murder but he successfully raises a defence of provocation, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact. Manslaughter will also carry a discretionary life sentence, but would be the least serious homicide offence under the proposals. It would consist of three types: 1. Causing death by a criminal act intended to cause injury; or 2. where the defendant was aware that a criminal act involved a serious risk of causing injury; or 3. gross negligence as to causing death. It is suggested that as the Law Commission proposals had attracted so much attention in texts and journals candidates should be broadly familiar with the provisions in the proposals and how (if at all) they would improve the current law (common law and under the Homicide Act 1957). Question 8 Voluntary Intoxication The Majewski rules are to the effect that voluntary intoxication is not a defence, but if the defendant is charged with a specific intent crime and he lacks mens rea, he is entitled to an acquittal (theft) or the charge is reduced to the basic intent alternative (e.g. section 18 OAPA to section 20). If the defendant is charged with a crime of basic intent, the prosecution does not have to prove mens rea. Non-insane automatism If the defendant is an automaton (Hill v Baxter etc) and is charged with a specific intent crime, irrespective of fault, he is not guilty, but if the defendant is charged with a crime of basic intent, he may be guilty if the prosecution proves he was Bailey reckless in becoming an automaton. SI and BI Candidates had to show that the distinction is vital, as without it the defences fail to operate. So, what is the distinction and how is it defined? Case law peculiarly fails to assist; Beard, Morgan, Majewski, Caldwell; is it all in the wording of the charge or is it a principled approach? The recommended textbook covers this is the required detail (see syllabus). Where students did not recite the tests on SI and BI from the key cases, but simply listed which offences are specific intent and which are basic, credit was given, but only if students were able to apply the listed offences to the rules on the defences; but if that was done well, the higher marks were available. Page 7 of 8
8 EXAMINATION STATISTICS Candidates Sitting: 145 Percentage Passing: 41% Distinctions Achieved: Institute of Legal Executives Page 8 of 8
LEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2012
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2012 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationThe learner can: 1.1 Define what is meant by a crime
Tech Level Unit Title: LAW OF CRIME Level: Level 3 Credit Value: 10 Guided Learning Hours 60 Learning outcomes The learner will: 1. Understand the principles of criminal liability Assessment criteria The
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 - CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2011
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 - CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2011 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2013
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2013 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More information1.2 Explain the nature of an actus reus. 1.4 Identify principal types of mens rea. 1.5 Explain the meaning and significance of transferred malice.
Unit 3 Title: Criminal Law Level: 3 Credit Value: 7 Learning outcomes The learner will: 1 Understand the fundamental principles of criminal liability Assessment criteria The learner can: 1.1 Define actus
More information1. The physical element of a crime is the a. mens rea b. actus reus c. offence d. intention
1) 11 CHOOSE THE BEST CHOICE AND MARK IT ON YOUR ANSWER SHEET. Part A: Fill in the Blanks 1. The physical element of a crime is the a. mens rea b. actus reus c. offence d. intention. A person is where
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JANUARY 2018
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JANUARY 2018 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide candidates and tutors with guidance as to the key points candidates
More informationLEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JANUARY 2012
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JANUARY 2012 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationCHIEF EXAMINER COMMENTS
CHIEF EXAMINER COMMENTS WITH SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2018 LEVEL 3 UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW Note to Candidates and Learning Centre Tutors: The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide candidates and learning
More informationTo begin, the behaviour and the defendant in question have to be identified as well as the offence they ve committed. This may be:
Homicide Offences To begin, the behaviour and the defendant in question have to be identified as well as the offence they ve committed. This may be: Murder or voluntary manslaughter if partial defences
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2016
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2016 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationCriminal Law. Text, Cases, and Materials. Janet Loveless. Third Edition UNIVERSITY PRESS
Criminal Law Text, Cases, and Materials Third Edition Janet Loveless UNIVERSITY PRESS Contents Guide to using the book Guide to the Online Resource Centre this edition Preface Acknowledgements Table cases
More informationLEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2014
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 3 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2014 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationChoose the best choice and mark it on your answer sheet. Part A: Fill in the Blanks
: : : : ( ) : : : : : / Choose the best choice and mark it on your answer sheet. Part A: Fill in the Blanks 1-The physical element of a crime is the 1. mens rea 2. actus reus 3. offence 4. intention 2-A
More informationCRIMINAL LAW SUMMARY LAWSKOOL.CO.UK LAWSKOOL PTY LTD
CRIMINAL LAW SUMMARY LAWSKOOL.CO.UK LAWSKOOL PTY LTD CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW 7 DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL LAW 7 Deterrence 7 Rehabilitation 7 Public Protection 7 Retribution 8 CRIMINAL LAW AND
More informationContents PART 1: CRIMINAL LIABILITY. Table of Statutes. Table of Secondary Legislation. Table of Cases
Contents Table of Statutes Table of Secondary Legislation Table of Cases PART 1: CRIMINAL LIABILITY Chapter 1: Fundamental Principles of Criminal Liability 1: Actus Reus 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Conduct as
More informationPreview from Notesale.co.uk Page 1 of 63
Criminal Law General Elements of Criminal Liability A guilty act (Actus Reus) + A guilty mind (Mens Rea) - Defense (Absence of a relevant defense) = Criminal liability The terms AR and MR are simply use
More informationAnswers to practical exercises
Answers to practical exercises Chapter 15: Answering problem questions Page 360: Evaluation/Marking Exercise Evaluating the work of others can be a really powerful way of improving your own work. The question
More informationLegal Liability. Sophie Foyston ROB
Legal Liability Sophie Foyston ROB14236233 Contents Task 1... 3 Part 1 (P1 and P2)... 3 Neighbour Principle... 3 Duty of Care... 3 Breach of Duty... 3 Damage... 4 Compensation... 4 Part 2 (M1)... 5 Part
More informationHSC Legal Studies. Year 2017 Mark Pages 46 Published Feb 6, Legal Studies: Crime. By Rose (99.4 ATAR)
HSC Legal Studies Year 2017 Mark 97.00 Pages 46 Published Feb 6, 2017 Legal Studies: Crime By Rose (99.4 ATAR) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Your notes author, Rose. Rose achieved an ATAR of 99.4 in
More informationCRIMINAL LAW. Sweet &. Maxwell's Textbook Series. 4th edition
CRIMINAL LAW Sweet &. Maxwell's Textbook Series 4th edition Alan Reed, M.A., LL.M., Solicitor Professor of Criminal and Private International Law, University of Sunderland and Ben Fitzpatrick, B.A., P.G.C.L.T.H.E.
More informationLAW1114: CRIMINAL LAW EXAM NOTES
LAW1114: CRIMINAL LAW EXAM NOTES CONTENTS TOPIC COMMON OTHER 1 S OF A CRIME 2 NON- FATAL, NON- SEXUAL AGAINST THE PERSON 3 SEXUAL 4 HOMICIDE 5 DEFENCES AR (p3) - Positive, voluntary act (PVA) - Causation
More informationCriminal Law Exam Notes
Criminal Law Exam Notes Contents LARCENY... Error! Bookmark not defined. Actus Reus... Error! Bookmark not defined. Taking & Carrying Away... Error! Bookmark not defined. Property Capable of Being Stolen...
More informationCRIMINAL LAW FINAL EXAM SUMMARY
CRIMINAL LAW FINAL EXAM SUMMARY Contents WEEK ONE CONTENT... Error! Bookmark not Woolmington v DPP [1935]... 7 Green v The Queen (1971)... 7 Youseff (1990)... 7 Zecevic v DPP (1987)... 7 WEEK 2 CONTENT...
More informationAQA A-Level Criminal Law
AQA A-Level Criminal Law Answers to self-test questions and tasks Chapter 1 The Nature of Law Task 1 I hope you read the text above this task, if so it should have been easy. Whether the decision achieved
More informationUnderlying principles of Criminal Liability
Actus Reus 2 of 9 THE GUILTY ACT! Involuntary Acts - does not form actus reus - Hill v Baxter (1958); swarm of bees Omissions - a failure to act is not an act. Where a person's contract requires him to
More informationUNIT 3 LEVEL 6 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS January 2011
UNIT 3 LEVEL 6 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS January 2011 Note The implementation of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 which affects the meaning of provocation (now loss of control) and diminished responsibility
More informationCriminal Law II Overview Jan June 2006
Inchoate Liability Incitement Incitement is the common law offence (see Whitehouse [1977]) of influencing the mind of another whilst intending him to commit a crime. Its actus reus is the actual communication
More informationExplain the meaning of the terms actus reus and mens rea in criminal law
1 Question 1 Explain the meaning of the terms actus reus and mens rea in criminal law Actus reus and mens rea are the basic foundations of criminal law. In this first part of the question we are going
More informationLEVEL 6 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JUNE 2015
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 6 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JUNE 2015 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationMLL214 CRIMINAL LAW NOTES
MLL214 CRIMINAL LAW NOTES Contents Topic 1: Course Overview... 3 Sources of Criminal Law... 4 Requirements for Criminal Liability... 4 Topic 2: Homicide and Actus Reus... Error! Bookmark not defined. Unlawful
More informationCriminal Law Outline intent crime
This outline was created for the July 2006 Oregon bar exam. The law changes over time, so use with caution. If you would like an editable version of this outline, go to www.barexammind.com/outlines. Criminal
More informationFOREWORD... 1 LAW... 2
SR5IN0201 FOREWORD... 1 LAW... 2 GCE Advanced Level... 2 Paper 9084/01 Paper 1... 2 Paper 9084/02 Paper 2... 3 This booklet contains reports written by Examiners on the work of candidates in certain papers.
More informationOffences 3. S300 Unlawful homicide 3. S302(1)(a) Intentional Murder 4. S303 Manslaughter 7. S335 Common Assault 9
4032LAW Exam Notes Offences 3 S300 Unlawful homicide 3 S302(1)(a) Intentional Murder 4 S303 Manslaughter 7 S335 Common Assault 9 S339 Assault occasioning bodily harm 10 S340 Serious assaults 11 S317 Acts
More informationIntroduction Crime, Law and Morality. Key Principles: actus reus, mens rea, legal personhood, doli incapax.
Introduction Crime, Law and Morality Key Principles: actus reus, mens rea, legal personhood, doli incapax. Objective Principles: * Constructive-murder rule: a person may be guilty of murder, if while in
More informationCRIM EXAM NOTES. Table of Contents. Weeks 1-4
CRIM EXAM NOTES Weeks 1-4 Table of Contents Setup (jurisdiction, BOP, onus)... 2 Elements, AR, Voluntariness... 3 Voluntariness, Automatism... 4 MR (intention, reckless, knowledge, negligence)... 5 Concurrence...
More informationVersion 3 A teacher s guide for the 2017 AQA specifications for Law 7161 and 7162
A teacher s guide for the 2017 AQA specifications for Law 7161 and 7162 This guide is based on my own books but you do not need to buy them to use it. What follows is mostly on changes to the specifications
More informationLAWS1206 Criminal Law and Procedure 1 st Semester 2005
LAWS1206 Criminal Law and Procedure 1 st Semester 2005 How to Use this Script: These sample exam answers are based on problems done in past years. Since these answers were written, the law has changed
More informationMens Rea case law problem
Mens Rea case law problem Hyam v DPP (1975) HL D sought to frighten an occupant of a house by pouring petrol though the letterbox and then igniting it, resulting in the death of two occupants by asphyxia.
More informationLAW04: Criminal Law (Offences against Property) Defences: Duress
LAW04: Criminal Law (Offences against Property) Defences: Duress This defence is based on the fact that the D has been forced to commit a crime. The D has committed the crime because he has been threatened
More informationFOREWORD... 1 LAW... 2
FOREWORD... 1 LAW... 2 GCE Advanced Level... 2 Paper 9084/01 Law and the Legal Process... 2 Paper 9084/02 Legal Liabilities... 3 This booklet contains reports written by Examiners on the work of candidates
More informationklm Mark Scheme General Certificate of Education January 2012 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Unit 3
klm General Certificate of Education January 2012 Law LAW03 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Unit 3 Mark Scheme Mark schemes are prepared by the Principal Examiner and considered,
More informationGuide to Criminal Law. Contents
Introduction Contents Table of cases 1. The Development of Law 15 Customs 15 General customs 16 Local customs 16 Common law 16 Equity 18 Judicial precedents 19 The doctrine of precedents 19 Original precedents
More informationSOC 3395: Criminal Justice & Corrections Lecture 4&5: Criminal Law & Criminal Justice in Canada II:
SOC 3395: Criminal Justice & Corrections Lecture 4&5: Criminal Law & Criminal Justice in Canada II: In the next 2 classes we will consider: (i) Canadian constitutional mechanics; (ii) Types of law; (iii)
More informationCRIMINAL LAW: TEXT AND MATERIALS
CRIMINAL LAW: TEXT AND MATERIALS Fifth Edition by C. M. V. CLARKSON, B.A.,LL.B.,LL.M. Trofessor oflaw, University ofleicester H. M. KEATING, LL.M. Senior Lecturer in Law, University ofsussex LONDON SWEET
More informationCriminal Seminar Accessorial liability in criminal law after R v Jogee. Tuesday 25 October 2016
Criminal Seminar Accessorial liability in criminal law after R v Jogee Tuesday 25 October 2016 James Parry Chair, Criminal Law Committee Professor David Ormerod QC law commissioner for England and Wales
More informationPART 1: THE FUNDAMENTALS...
Contents PART 1: THE FUNDAMENTALS... 6 The Fundamentals of Criminal Law (CHAPTER 1)... 6 Sources of criminal law:... 6 Criminal capacity:... 7 Children:... 7 Corporations:... 7 Classifications of crimes:...
More information(1) Whosoever assaults any person, and thereby occasions actual bodily harm, shall be liable to imprisonment for five years.
SAMPLE Aggravated Assault s 59 Assault Occasioning ABH 59 Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (1) Whosoever assaults any person, and thereby occasions actual bodily harm, shall be liable to imprisonment
More informationGeneral Certificate of Education June Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Unit 3. Mark Scheme
General Certificate of Education June 2012 Law LAW03 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Unit 3 Mark Scheme Mark schemes are prepared by the Principal Examiner and considered, together
More informationCRIMINAL LAW TJ MCINTYRE SEAN Ô TOGHDA
CRIMINAL LAW TJ MCINTYRE SEAN Ô TOGHDA ROUND HALL THOMSON REUTERS TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Preface Table of Cases Table of vii ix xix xxxi CHAPTER 1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES 1 Defining the Criminal Law 1 Background
More informationLEVEL 6 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2013
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 6 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS - JANUARY 2013 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationJURD7122/LAWS1022 Criminal Laws
JURD7122/LAWS1022 Criminal Laws MURDER... 5 ELEMENTS... 5 ACTUS REUS... 5 Voluntariness... 5 Ommission... 5 Causation... 5 MENS REA... 5 Heads of mens rea:... 5 Intention to kill... 5 Intention to inflict
More informationExaminers report 2012
Examiners report 2012 LA1010 Criminal law Zone A Introduction As with all undergraduate cohorts, the quality of answers ranged from first class to weak fails. Too many candidates were content to skate
More informationA-Level Law. LAW03 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Law Final Mark Scheme June Version/Stage: v1.
A-Level Law LAW03 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Law Final Mark Scheme 2160 June 2017 Version/Stage: v1.0 Mark schemes are prepared by the Lead Assessment Writer and considered,
More informationAssessment criteria. The learner can: 1.1 Analyse the general nature of the actus reus. 1.2 Analyse the rules of causation
Unit 3 Title: Criminal Law Level: 6 Credit Value: 15 Learning outcomes The learner will: 1 Understand the fundamental requirements of criminal liability Assessment criteria The learner can: 1.1 Analyse
More informationCourse breakdown 1) Theory 2) Offences 3) Extended liability 4) Defences 5) Procedure
Course breakdown 1) Theory a. Principles, classic model & criminal method b. Element analysis 2) Offences a. Dishonesty b. Unlawful killing c. Non-fatal offences against the person d. Sexual offences 3)
More informationAssessment criteria. The learner can: 1.1 Analyse the general nature of the actus reus. 1.2 Analyse the rules of causation
Unit 3 Title: Criminal Law Level: 6 Credit Value: 15 Learning outcomes The learner will: 1 Understand the fundamental requirements of criminal liability Assessment criteria The learner can: 1.1 Analyse
More informationIntroduction to Criminal Law
Introduction to Criminal Law CHAPTER CONTENTS Introduction 2 Crimes versus Civil Wrongs 2 Types of Criminal Offences 3 General Principles of Criminal Law 4 Accessories and Parties to Crimes 5 Attempted
More informationExaminers report 2013
Examiners report 2013 Examiners report 2013 LA1010 Criminal law Zone A Introduction As with all undergraduate examinations the quality of answers ranged from first class to weak fails. Too many candidates
More informationCRIMINAL LAW MURDER & MANSLAUGHTER
CRIMINAL LAW MURDER & MANSLAUGHTER This is basically a common-law offence and to constitute it there must be an unlawful killing of another human being under the Queen s peace with malice aforethought.
More informationThe Sources of and Limits on Criminal Law 1
CONTENTS Preface xiii Acknowledgments About the Author xv xvii I. CHAPTER 1 The Sources of and Limits on Criminal Law 1 A. Introduction 1 1. The Purpose of Criminal Law 1 a) Morality and Blame 2 b) The
More informationCRIMINAL LITIGATION PRE-COURSE MATERIALS
Legal Practice Course 2014-2015 CRIMINAL LITIGATION PRE-COURSE MATERIALS Copyright Bristol Institute of Legal Practice, UWE AN INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LITIGATION 1. Introduction: You will be studying
More informationCriminal Law ( )
Criminal Law (2014-2015) View Online 1. 2. Glazebrook, P. R. Blackstone s statutes on criminal law 2012-2013. Blackstone s statutes series, (Oxford University Press, 2012). 3. Ashworth, Andrew & Horder,
More informationCriminal Law. Concentrate. Preview Copyrighted Material. Rebecca Huxley-Binns. 4th edition
Criminal Law Concentrate Rebecca Huxley-Binns Professor of Legal Education, Nottingham Law School National Teaching Fellow 4th edition 1 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford
More informationLEVEL 6 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JANUARY 2016
Note to Candidates and Tutors: LEVEL 6 - UNIT 3 CRIMINAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWERS JANUARY 2016 The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationI. Limits of Criminal law a. Due process b. Principle of legality c. Void for vagueness II. Mental State a. Traditional law i.
I. Limits of Criminal law a. Due process b. Principle of legality c. Void for vagueness II. Mental State a. Traditional law i. A specific intent crime is one in which an actual intent on the part of the
More informationLAW SHEET No.1 UNLAWFUL KILLING 1
LAW SHEET No.1 UNLAWFUL KILLING 1 1. Following the decision of the High Court in R (Wilkinson) v HM Coroner for Greater Manchester South District [2012] EWHC 2755 (Admin) the conclusion 2 of unlawful killing
More informationMLL214: CRIMINAL LAW
MLL214: CRIMINAL LAW 1 Examinable Offences: 2 Part 1: The Fundamentals of Criminal Law The definition and justification of the criminal law The definition of crime Professor Glanville Williams defines
More informationCriminal Law A Flowchart
Part 1: Has A Crime Been Committed Actus Reas (Physical Element of Crime): Criminal Law A Flowchart 1. Automatism and Voluntariness a. Was the act done by a sane mind and was voluntary? i. Accidents count
More informationAssessment criteria. The learner can: 1.1 Analyse the general nature of the actus reus. 1.2 Analyse the rules of causation
Unit 3 Title: Criminal Law Level: 6 Credit Value: 15 Learning outcomes The learner will: 1 Understand the fundamental requirements of criminal liability Assessment criteria The learner can: 1.1 Analyse
More informationZIMBABWE SCHOOL EXAMINATIONS COUNCIL (ZIMSEC) ORDINARY LEVEL SYLLABUS/SCHOOL CERTIFICATE LAW (2292)
ZIMBABWE SCHOOL EXAMINATIONS COUNCIL (ZIMSEC) ORDINARY LEVEL SYLLABUS/SCHOOL CERTIFICATE LAW (2292) EXAMINATION SYLLABUS FOR NOVEMBER EXAMINATION ONLY Aims 1. To stimulate a study of the principles and
More informationBar Council response to the Reform of Offences against the Person Scoping Consultation Paper
Bar Council response to the Reform of Offences against the Person Scoping Consultation Paper 1. This is the response of the General Council of the Bar of England and Wales (the Bar Council) to the Law
More informationA-LEVEL LAW. LAW 03 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Law Report on the Examination June Version: 1.
A-LEVEL LAW LAW 03 Criminal Law (Offences against the Person) or Contract Law Report on the Examination 2160 June 2015 Version: 1.0 Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright
More informationSTANSFIELD COLLEGE CRIMINAL LAW Non-Fatal Offences & Consent
STANSFIELD COLLEGE CRIMINAL LAW Non-Fatal Offences & Consent 2013-2014 CRIMINAL LAW LECTURE 1 Definition of Assault: D intentionally or recklessly CRIMINAL LAW LECTURE 2 Causes another to apprehend the
More informationHomicide: Intent and Reckless Indifference [Week 1B]! Wednesday, 30 July 2014! 3:12 pm! Criminal Laws (Brown et al) [ ]!! Homicide: Murder and
Homicide: Intent and Reckless Indifference [Week 1B] Wednesday, 30 July 2014 3:12 pm Criminal Laws (Brown et al) [425-448] Homicide: Murder and Involuntary Manslaughter Patterns of Homicide: A Wallace,
More informationTHE CRIMINAL EQUATION
THE CRIMINAL EQUATION Actus Reus + Mens Rea = CRIME Actus Reus Latin for guilty act This simply means the physical act of committing a crime 1 Mens Rea Latin for guilty In the Criminal Code you will find
More informationExaminers report 2009
Examiners report 2009 Examiners report 2009 2650010 Criminal law Zone B Introduction The overall standard of candidates performance was certainly higher than last year and that was reflected in an increase
More informationCRIMINAL LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #2 MODEL ANSWER. 1. With what crime or crimes should Dan be charged? Discuss.
CRIMINAL LAW ESSAY SERIES ESSAY QUESTION #2 MODEL ANSWER As Dan walked down a busy city street one afternoon, Vic, a scruffy, long-haired young man, approached him. For some time, Dan had been plagued
More informationCRIMINAL OFFENCES. Chapter 9
CRIMINAL OFFENCES Chapter 9 LEVELS OF OFFENCES In the Canadian legal system we have three levels of criminal offences. Summary Conviction Offences Indictable Offences Hybrid Offences LEVELS OF OFFENCES:
More informationJUDICIAL COLLEGE. 3. There is no longer any separate category of parasitic accessory/joint enterprise liability.
JUDICIAL COLLEGE A NOTE ON SECONDARY LIABILITY AND JOINT ENTERPRISE AFTER JOGEE 1 1. As the recent case of R v Jogee 2 ; Ruddock v The Queen 3 makes clear, the same principles govern every form of secondary
More informationA CASEBOOK ON SCOTTISH CRIMINAL LAW
A CASEBOOK ON SCOTTISH CRIMINAL LAW Fourth Edition Christopher H.W. Gane, LL.B., Professor of Scots Law, University of Aberdeen Charles N. Stoddart, LL.B., LL.M. (McGill), Ph.D., Formerly Sheriff of Lothian
More informationElements of a crime. roofs: File not for distribution without prior permission from Pearson Education. This chapter explains:
1 Elements of a crime This chapter explains: that the defendant must usually have both committed an actus reus (a guilty act) and have a mens rea (a guilty mind) to be liable for a criminal offence; that
More informationPrincipals and Accessories after Jogee
1 Principals and Accessories after Jogee The best way in to understanding the state of the law on principals and accessories 1 after the UKSC s decision in Jogee [2016] UKSC 8 is by considering a number
More informationPrinciples of Criminal Liability 2: Mens Rea
Principles of Criminal Liability 2: Mens Rea By the end of this unit, you will be able to (AO1): Explain the different ways mens rea can be formed in the law. Describe what is meant by direct and oblique
More informationDefenses for the Accused. Chapter 10
Defenses for the Accused Chapter 10 Denial A defense is the denial of committing the act or giving justification of what otherwise would be considered a criminal act. The most common defense for an accused
More informationQuestion 2. With what crimes, if any, could Al be charged and what defenses, if any, could he assert? Discuss.
Question 2 Al and his wife Bobbie owned a laundromat and lived in an apartment above it. They were having significant financial difficulties because the laundromat had been losing money. Unbeknownst to
More informationMLL214 CRIMINAL LAW 2013 MICHAEL KRIEWALDT
MLL214 CRIMINAL LAW 2013 MICHAEL KRIEWALDT THE FUNDAMENTALS OF CRIMINAL LAW 1 1. Introduction In this unit we are looking at the basic principles and underlying rationales of the substantive criminal law.
More informationCRIMINAL LAW. Problem Question Notes. PRINCIPLES... 1 Capacity Actus Reus Mens Rea... 4 Coincidence... 6!
CRIMINAL LAW Problem Question Notes PRINCIPLES... 1 Capacity... 2 Actus Reus... 3 Mens Rea... 4 Coincidence... 6 OFFENCES... 7 Common Assault... 8 Actus Reus... 8 Mens Rea... 9 Consent to Harm... 10 Aggravated
More informationQUESTION What charges can reasonably be brought against Steve? Discuss. 2. What charges can reasonably be brought against Will? Discuss.
QUESTION 2 Will asked Steve, a professional assassin, to kill Adam, a business rival, and Steve accepted. Before Steve was scheduled to kill Adam, Will heard that Adam s business was failing. Will told
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS. Preface... Major Works Referred to... INTRODUCTION: THE NEED TO ADOPT BROADER PERSPECTIVES... 1
Preface... Major Works Referred to... v ix Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION: THE NEED TO ADOPT BROADER PERSPECTIVES... 1 A. Canada s Criminal Code... 2 B. Rocky Road to General Part... 4 C. Sources of Criminal Law...
More informationHomework. End of Unit Assessment 13D 13A
PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY 2: Mens Rea By the end of this unit, you will be able to (AO1): Understand what is meant by the term mens rea and the different states of mind that this evolves Explain
More informationCRIMINAL LAW SUMMARY 2011
SUMMARY 2011 LAWSKOOL PTY LTD CONTENTS PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURES DISCRETION TO ARREST Internal police guidelines LEGALITY OF ARREST POLICE INTERVIEW IN CUSTODY PHYSICAL ELEMENTS Conduct Conduct which occurs
More informationSlide 1. Slide 2 Basic denial defence which is used when the accused claims that he or she was not present at the time of the offence.
Slide 1 (including Excuses and Justifications) Slide 2 Basic denial defence which is used when the accused claims that he or she was not present at the time of the offence. Independent evidence supporting
More informationActus Reus - Introduction
Actus Reus - Introduction 1/10 MR e.g. Unlawful application of force ( Lord Steyn in R v Ireland [1997]) - Conduct Crime Assault causing actual bodily harm (s47 OAPA) - Result Crime Actus Reus - Introduction
More informationHSC Legal Studies. Year 2016 Mark Pages 33 Published Feb 7, Legal- Crime Notes. By Annabelle (97.35 ATAR)
HSC Legal Studies Year 2016 Mark 94.00 Pages 33 Published Feb 7, 2017 Legal- Crime Notes By Annabelle (97.35 ATAR) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Your notes author, Annabelle. Annabelle achieved an ATAR
More informationCriminal Law Fact Sheet
What is criminal law? Murder, fraud, drugs, sex, robbery, drink driving stories of people committing crimes fills the news headlines every single day. It is an area of law which captures the imagination
More informationQuestion With what crime or crimes should Dan be charged? Discuss. 2. What defense or defenses might Dan assert? Discuss.
Question 2 As Dan walked down a busy city street one afternoon, Vic, a scruffy, long-haired young man, approached him. For some time, Dan had been plagued by a pathological fear that long-haired transients
More informationFALL 2011 December 12, 2011 FINAL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER MULTIPLE CHOICE
CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSOR DEWOLF FALL 2011 December 12, 2011 FINAL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER MULTIPLE CHOICE 1. (A) is incorrect, because a solicitation does not require agreement on the part of the object of the
More informationFAULT ELEMENTS, STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY. Generally involves an actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind).
FAULT ELEMENTS, STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY CRIME A wrong punishable by the State. Generally involves an actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind). Description of a prohibited behaviour
More informationSAMPLE Criminal Law HD Exam Scaffold
SEXUAL ASAULT -s 61I Crimes Act 'Basic' sexual assault: Actus reus: the Crown must prove BRD both of the following limbs: 1. The accused must have had sexual intercourse with the victim. Sexual penetration
More information