Aqa law unit 3/4 *official thread*

Guys for law and justice has anyone got a decent answer the book has too much information i cant digest it all?

Reply 25

emmapotter392

Does anyone have any model answers on loss of control and diminished responsibility??

Reply 26

Anyone else think the scenarios In June 2013 is rock solid?

Reply 27

NHM

OP

Original post by SunDun111

Anyone else think the scenarios In June 2013 is rock solid?

Scenario 2 yes! I got stuck on the dog bit obviously its gbh but it was the dog that caused the wound... not Kris (apparently this was an omission - got to admit I would have never put this in the exam!) Would have had to do scenario 1..

Reply 28

Original post by NHM

Scenario 2 yes! I got stuck on the dog bit obviously its gbh but it was the dog that caused the wound... not Kris (apparently this was an omission - got to admit I would have never put this in the exam!) Would have had to do scenario 1..

When they is an omission do i have to prove causation? I get confused when I have to prove causation for Non-fatal offences

Reply 29

NHM

OP

Original post by SunDun111

When they is an omission do i have to prove causation? I get confused when I have to prove causation for Non-fatal offences

No! You don't really have to talk about causation at A2 unless there is an intervening act... the dog isn't an intervening act, its basically the cause of the injury.

Reply 30

Original post by NHM

No! You don't really have to talk about causation at A2 unless there is an intervening act... the dog isn't an intervening act, its basically the cause of the injury.

http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-LAW03-QP-JAN13.PDF

Can you explain to me how you would answer the question question on first scenario, I've learned all the content but can't get my head round the scenarios.

Reply 31

Original post by SunDun111

http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-LAW03-QP-JAN13.PDF

Can you explain to me how you would answer the question question on first scenario, I've learned all the content but can't get my head round the scenarios.

Alice -> Chris - ABH - causation issue of victims own act + transferred malice
Alice -> Dave - GBH + transferred malice - id argue s.18 as she she a vase at Beth thus she has intent to cause serious harm

Possible defence of Insanity

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 32

Original post by OrdinaryStudent

Alice -> Chris - ABH - causation issue of victims own act + transferred malice
Alice -> Dave - GBH + transferred malice - id argue s.18 as she she a vase at Beth thus she has intent to cause serious harm

Possible defence of Insanity

When talking about causation are you going to mention factual and legal? How would you fit it in?

Reply 33

Original post by SunDun111

When talking about causation are you going to mention factual and legal? How would you fit it in?

But for Alices action chris would not have ... (Pagett)

It was reasonably forseeable for Chris to try and move out fo the way (Roberts)

Id mention it after establishing the AR

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 34

Rust Cohle

6

Original post by SunDun111

When talking about causation are you going to mention factual and legal? How would you fit it in?

Tuck it in right between the AR and MR.

To be the cause in fact, V must not have suffered harm but for D's conduct (White/Pagett). But for X hitting Y, Y would not have died, establishing X as the factual cause.

To be the cause in law, D must be the operative and substantial cause (case)
This may be in question as the intervening act of _____ may break the chain of causation (case). For the chain the be broken ______. And apply

Reply 35

Lizaa1

Hi! Please can someone help me with these last minute questions.

This may sound stupid but firstly, when talking about 'voluntary or involantary manslaughter' Do we talk about this without talking about murder? I'm confused to whether or not 'loss of control' and 'diminished responsibility' are defences to be talked about with murder or not???

Next: For both ABH and GBH pyschiatric injury can satsify them. But one of them is 'serious pychiatric injury'. What are some examples of 'serious' ones?

Thank you!!!

Reply 36

Original post by Lizaa1

Hi! Please can someone help me with these last minute questions.

This may sound stupid but firstly, when talking about 'voluntary or involantary manslaughter' Do we talk about this without talking about murder? I'm confused to whether or not 'loss of control' and 'diminished responsibility' are defences to be talked about with murder or not???

Next: For both ABH and GBH pyschiatric injury can satsify them. But one of them is 'serious pychiatric injury'. What are some examples of 'serious' ones?

Thank you!!!

for GBH they may say something like severe depression rather than just depression.

For murder it can be moved to Voluntary Manslaughter with DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY and LOSS of CONTROL - DR and LOC can only be used for murder

Reply 37

SinsNotTragedies

3

How would you structure a homicide scenario question? :holmes:

Reply 38

Lizaa1

Original post by OrdinaryStudent

for GBH they may say something like severe depression rather than just depression.

For murder it can be moved to Voluntary Manslaughter with DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY and LOSS of CONTROL - DR and LOC can only be used for murder

Thank you!!! So is Involunatary manslaughter (Unlawful act and gross negligence) concepts on their own?

Reply 39