Aqa Law Unit 3 15th june 2012

What I do is for example say, "In so and so committing the act of this, the most likely offence would be that of a s.20 malicious wounding offence whereby the actus reus and mens rea for this offence must be satisfied for conviction". Then I go into applying the law to the detail of the AR and MR. Like "The actus reus for a s.20 OAPA 1861 offence is that of an act or omission which inflicts wounding (Eissenhower) or greivous bodily harm (Smith) upon another, followed by the application and detail of what amounts to a wound etc.

Am I right in that there are multiple non-fatals within the scenario which must be dealt with like for example, a s.20, s.47 and also a common assault followed by a defence all in one para and Q?

Lastly, when setting you're Murder scenario essay out do you explain the AR and MR of murder then apply and say murder would be the conviction without taking into account any defences, then go on to explaining any defences of loss of control or DR below if any occur in the scenario?

Thanks!

Yeah sounds good, I've been revising for my English Language and History exams for next week which has taken a lot of my time up unfortunately. It's a good job I resat the Unit 2 Law last week, as a decent amount of the content for that comes in handy for this one. I've got two A level essays for the Defenses and NFO so if I get them learned and out the way with first in the exam, that should be a third of the marks bagged!

Hey,
I think the exam might be okay this time, but I am very confused for one part. When explaining about murder, for the MR it has a lot of cases based on the foresight of consequences, but these cases are all follow ups. Do we need to know all of those cases? Thank you. How is everyone feeling about the exam which is exactly one week away =s

I really hope AQA don't do what they did in the Jan paper - putting non fatals and manslaughter into one question!!

I know, do you think they will or do you think that january paper was just a wake up call for schools to teach the whole syllabus?

I really hope they don't! I hate manslaughter! Possibly, I think they may have done it because apparently the paper was becoming to predictable!!
Did you sit the paper in Jan? I could of cried when I saw that question because I wanted to answer the question on murder having revised it!

Same here. I know same here. yeah i got a D thats why im resitting wbu? same here i was confused for like 5 mins and was like wtf this was not part of the plan lol :P

I got a C. What are you aiming for overall? I hope this paper is easier than Jan! I really hope that defences comes up as the evaulation question - I think i'll go crazy if murder comes up again but I wouldn't put it past AQA doing that again!

how many ums points? I need a B overall for uni i got an A for AS so i only need a C overall in A2... and with unit 4 being a bit harder than 3 im hoping i can get an A in this paper so that way i only need like an E in the unit 4 paper. wbu what are you aiming for and what did you get for AS? yeah i have a feeling the defences will come up... but i would be happy if non fatals came up for the evaluation. I dont think that AQA will ask for murder evaluation again either.

I think it was 63 you? Thats good, takes the pressure off of unit 4! Unit 4 is hard and theres so much to remember! Well i'd like an A - got a B at AS.
I'd love it if defences came up - i've revised it so fingers crossed. Yeah I thought that, surely they won't ask it again but you never know with them. I just want this exam over with now!! Are you revising everything? including manslaughter? because in Jan I made the mistake of revising everything except manslaughter as I thought i'd get the option to choose between manslaughter and murder! I'm just scared they do the same thing in Jan and mess up the question again.
Did your teacher tell you what marks you got on each indivdual question for the Jan paper?

Thats better than my 50 yeah are you doing tort? ohh cool cool....yeah same here ive revised insanity and consent wbu? well i havent revised manslaughter but i might go over it quickly.... i think if the same thing came up as the january paper i will just do the non fatal question because involuntary manslaughter wasnt in that one..... yeah i got 10/30 marks for the first question cuz i got put of so much by the involuntary manslaughter part so didint even do it properly... for the second question i got 22/25 so i was happy with the murder part and lastly for the evaluation i got 12/25 and that was because i didnt evaluate the partial defences so yeah i did crap but this time round i reckon if I did that same paper tomorrow i would get a B... wbu what did you get?

No i'm doing criminal, is tort really hard? I've done insanity and automatism - they don't specify in the question which two we have to do, do they? We can do any defences? Yeah, I agree, I think i'll go over it briefly and hope for the best! You did well on the murder question - they are the best because they're just straightfoward. I got 18/25 on the first question, 21/25 on the second, and 16/25 on the evaulation question. I think if they give us a straightfoward non fatal and murder question, and the defences evaulation we should do well!

Yeah tort is hard tbh, theres a lot to know... how is criminal? No they dont they will give us the choice of any two. yeah exactly i was prepared for the murder and normal non fatals but then the involuntary manslaughter really put me off. and for the evaluation i didnt know it fully tbh so thats why i did bad on that part. you did good tbh.... yeah i know hopefully.

Criminals quite interesting, just a lot to learn. I felt the same, I had revised the evaulation except the partial defences. I honestly don't know why I didn't do the first scenario, apparently it was much easier - just non fatals?

ohh right cool cool....

yes i know i just saw murder and went for it really i didnt read the other scenario which was a stupid mistake ohh well next friday im hopefully gone smash the exam aha :P hopefully an A if it is non fatals only, murder, then evaluation of defences if not non fatals.

What do you mean by these cases are all follow up? the cases you need for MR are R v Vickers, R v Nedrick, R v Woolin and R v Matthews & Alleyne.

feeling good tbh could do the paper now if i wanted to wbu?

Yes, they start off with Moloney moving to Hancock and Shankland, Nedrick, Woollin and finally Matthews and Alleyne. However, Woollin is the leading case and Matthews and Alleyne kinda of follows in Woollin's footsteps. So do we need to know Moloney, Hancock and Shankland and Nedrick?

I guess if the evaluation question is on defences and the paper wasn't like the one in Jan, then yeah I should be fine. Do you think it would be fine not to revise Involuntary Manslaughter?