[Terminator7t]

(Original post by Bazaraza)
The questions on strict Liability were fairly easy.

Statement A: Incorrect, infact Burce was guilty of selling the lottery ticket to That Molly or whoever (15 years of age) (Shah Shah Facts)
Statement B: Correct, that butcher dude was guilty of a strict liability offence by selling the two rabbits. (Callow v Tillstone Facts)
Statement C: Incorrect, the food poisioning isnt part of s20 of OAP 1861. instead another offence would be charged.
Statement D: Could potentially go either way due to the MR of Bruce (Put the fire through the letterbox). S18 only requires intention hence it would be so hard for the prosecution to prove.

PLEASE TELL ME I AM CORRECT. I NEEDED THOSE 20 MARKS BAD CAUSE I F##KED UP ON SECTION A!

Sounds good to me. For Statement D I put Bruce would not be guilty of s18 because there is no evidence he had specific intention. S20 would be the correct charge as he is reckless.

[MikaelMckenzie]

Surely for section D he had the intent as he did it at night knowing she would be asleep? He was both sane and sober at the time of the commission of the offence too?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[vicky22]

Did anyone answer the part b on theft and the part c of strict liability& non-fatal offences in this june paper that has just been? if so could you please outline what you've written? I think I may have messed part b up hugely.

[LizAnn]

(Original post by vicky22)
Did anyone answer the part b on theft and the part c of strict liability& non-fatal offences in this june paper that has just been? if so could you please outline what you've written? I think I may have messed part b up hugely.

I did the part B section on liability under the Theft Act- which bits do you think you may have messed up?

[vicky22]

I applied theft to both stan and Tom and then for Tom I applied burglary and robbery and can't really remember what else I wrote but maybe something else for Tom? I'm not 100% sure though, i was just wondering what they were actually liable for as I was panicking too much to apply the law very well

[LizAnn]

(Original post by vicky22)
I applied theft to both stan and Tom and then for Tom I applied burglary and robbery and can't really remember what else I wrote but maybe something else for Tom? I'm not 100% sure though, i was just wondering what they were actually liable for as I was panicking too much to apply the law very well

For Stan, I think I said he could be liable for s.9(1)(a) burglary as he entered the building the first time intending to steal, and talked about theft as I said eating the chocolate before he left could make him liable. But yeah, I also applied theft, robbery, and burglary (I think I talked about both S.9(1)(a) and S.9(1)(b) burglary) to Tom, and said he'd probably be liable for burglary due to stealing the fish (which obviously included the completed theft element) and he could also be liable for robbery if it was held that the theft was ongoing when he threw the bag (I think it was a bag?) at the security guard.
And same here, I was panicking a little bit- it seemed as though there was too much to write. Would've been nice if it had just been a question on theft, but hey.

[vicky22]

(Original post by LizAnn)
For Stan, I think I said he could be liable for s.9(1)(a) burglary as he entered the building the first time intending to steal, and talked about theft as I said eating the chocolate before he left could make him liable. But yeah, I also applied theft, robbery, and burglary (I think I talked about both S.9(1)(a) and S.9(1)(b) burglary) to Tom, and said he'd probably be liable for burglary due to stealing the fish (which obviously included the completed theft element) and he could also be liable for robbery if it was held that the theft was ongoing when he threw the bag (I think it was a bag?) at the security guard.
And same here, I was panicking a little bit- it seemed as though there was too much to write. Would've been nice if it had just been a question on theft, but hey.

I've done pretty much the same for Tom and similar for stan but not for the s91a burglary for stan which ive missed out! But it's not as bad as I thought thanks for your help!

[imamarouna]

(Original post by reb306)
I hated it, I mainly revised elements of a crime for section A and they didn't even put one on the paper So I dont know how that section went but sections B and C were fine, I did the theft robbery burglary one and strict liability and the oapa one, I'm just going to have to hope I got at least a C, then if I get a B in attempts then I can still get an A overall cause I had 190/200 AS marks

I didnt really like it but i just tell myself it could been worse , and none of the ones i was hoping for came up and i didnt revise offence against person an that came up in all sections i wasnt very pleased , I did Insanity , Invo manslaughter as i thought theft robbery and burglary will not have a lot to talk about or i may miss a valuable point , and i did attempt one since i have already sat in jan and am familiar with it , 190/200 is really good well done and i am hoping for A but I will need a mirracle as i got 158/200 in AS , What did you get in english legal system ? and you should get an A if you can achieve that in AS

[reb306]

(Original post by imamarouna)
I didnt really like it but i just tell myself it could been worse , and none of the ones i was hoping for came up and i didnt revise offence against person an that came up in all sections i wasnt very pleased , I did Insanity , Invo manslaughter as i thought theft robbery and burglary will not have a lot to talk about or i may miss a valuable point , and i did attempt one since i have already sat in jan and am familiar with it , 190/200 is really good well done and i am hoping for A but I will need a mirracle as i got 158/200 in AS , What did you get in english legal system ? and you should get an A if you can achieve that in AS

Yeah true it could have been worse, yeah theft robbery burglary was a but tricky to try and describe and apply every single point, thanks I got lucky with those exams I took gambles and they came up lol, I got 110/120 for els then 80 for sources of law (which I owe to delegated legislation lol) Yeah I hope I do but cause I've been doing psychology AS and A2 in a year and we didn't sit a jan exam for law it's kina been like last thing on the list you know I really haven't put in enough effort into it over the year as I have for Maths and psychology, I've just got to hope for the best, would you happen to have the paper for the g154 jan exam or can you remember which quote they used? And have you got any tips for it?

[reb306]

(Original post by LizAnn)
For Stan, I think I said he could be liable for s.9(1)(a) burglary as he entered the building the first time intending to steal, and talked about theft as I said eating the chocolate before he left could make him liable. But yeah, I also applied theft, robbery, and burglary (I think I talked about both S.9(1)(a) and S.9(1)(b) burglary) to Tom, and said he'd probably be liable for burglary due to stealing the fish (which obviously included the completed theft element) and he could also be liable for robbery if it was held that the theft was ongoing when he threw the bag (I think it was a bag?) at the security guard.
And same here, I was panicking a little bit- it seemed as though there was too much to write. Would've been nice if it had just been a question on theft, but hey.

What did you guy write for when stan kicked the security guard? I said that if it was inside he could possibly be liable for 9(1)(b) as he had intention to cause gbh by kicking him in the head but I said he wouldn't be because loss of consciousness was abh, but I forgot that attempting to cause gbh could amount to burglary and did anyone say that stan may have possibly thought he had a right to the chocolates as he may have thought they were free but then I said if the jury found his acts to be dishonest and thought stan knew this then he would be liable for 9(1)(b)?

[LizAnn]

(Original post by reb306)
What did you guy write for when stan kicked the security guard? I said that if it was inside he could possibly be liable for 9(1)(b) as he had intention to cause gbh by kicking him in the head but I said he wouldn't be because loss of consciousness was abh, but I forgot that attempting to cause gbh could amount to burglary and did anyone say that stan may have possibly thought he had a right to the chocolates as he may have thought they were free but then I said if the jury found his acts to be dishonest and thought stan knew this then he would be liable for 9(1)(b)?

I think I got a bit mixed up on that bit (was really rushing by the end of that question). But I guess you could say that Stan might be liable for S.9(1)(b) because kicking him in the head might be an attempt at GBH, but it's probably one of those things you can argue either way. And yeah, I said that the theft of the chocolates meant that Stan could be liable for S.9(1)(b) as there was a completed theft- I just said that a jury would probably find him dishonest, but if you mentioned the possibility of the exceptions it probably wouldn't be a problem. At the end of the day, you're still showing off that you're aware of the exceptions, and in saying that Stan might come under one- but that the jury could find him guilty if they thought otherwise- you're still applying the law in a relevant way.

[toptipping22]

(Original post by MikaelMckenzie)
Surely for section D he had the intent as he did it at night knowing she would be asleep? He was both sane and sober at the time of the commission of the offence too?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

I agree with you on this one. As section C is all about analysis you have to look at the specific facts they provide as clues. The fact that it was at night and there was likely to be few people around, the fact that he was at Molly's house and actually lit the newspaper and put it through the letterbox suggested to me he could easily be found to have specific intent to cause GBH in S.18. However i think they mark scheme may allow you either answer to that scenario.

In relation to statement C, a few of the comments are saying that it was incorrect as Bruce would not be liable for a S.20 because food poisoning would not satisfy any of the CPS charging standards. Which is all correct, however I am pretty sure the statement said Bruce would NOT be liable for a S.20 and therefore make the statement correct.

[shan93]

(Original post by Bazaraza)
The questions on strict Liability were fairly easy.

Statement A: Incorrect, infact Burce was guilty of selling the lottery ticket to That Molly or whoever (15 years of age) (Shah Shah Facts)
Statement B: Correct, that butcher dude was guilty of a strict liability offence by selling the two rabbits. (Callow v Tillstone Facts)
Statement C: Incorrect, the food poisioning isnt part of s20 of OAP 1861. instead another offence would be charged.
Statement D: Could potentially go either way due to the MR of Bruce (Put the fire through the letterbox). S18 only requires intention hence it would be so hard for the prosecution to prove.

PLEASE TELL ME I AM CORRECT. I NEEDED THOSE 20 MARKS BAD CAUSE I F##KED UP ON SECTION A!

For statement A i wrote the same, usually you don't need to include cases in Section C but I was running out of things to say so can't see the harm in putting them in.
Statement B, I also put the same, how it doesn't matter if you took all reasonable steps Callow V Tillstone etc.
Statement C- I can't actually remember what i put? My minds gone blank but I think I said incorrect.
Statement D- i said that it was correct because of the mens rea I thought he had clear intention and referred to cases similar and oblique intent.

Which section A did you answer?

i hate this exam!! haha

[shan93]

Also just wondering, If i have 153/200 at AS level What sort of marks do I need to be able to get an A or B overall?

[LizAnn]

(Original post by shan93)
Also just wondering, If i have 153/200 at AS level What sort of marks do I need to be able to get an A or B overall?

You need 320/400 at A-level to get an A- so you'd need to get 167 across both the special study and criminal law to get an A. For a B, you need 280/400 so across the two A2 exams you'd need a total of 127 marks.

[shan93]

(Original post by LizAnn)
You need 320/400 at A-level to get an A- so you'd need to get 167 across both the special study and criminal law to get an A. For a B, you need 280/400 so across the two A2 exams you'd need a total of 127 marks.

Thank you x

[imamarouna]

(Original post by reb306)
Yeah true it could have been worse, yeah theft robbery burglary was a but tricky to try and describe and apply every single point, thanks I got lucky with those exams I took gambles and they came up lol, I got 110/120 for els then 80 for sources of law (which I owe to delegated legislation lol) Yeah I hope I do but cause I've been doing psychology AS and A2 in a year and we didn't sit a jan exam for law it's kina been like last thing on the list you know I really haven't put in enough effort into it over the year as I have for Maths and psychology, I've just got to hope for the best, would you happen to have the paper for the g154 jan exam or can you remember which quote they used? And have you got any tips for it?

I answered young offenders in the english legal system and i revised it an hour before the exam and if i hadnt i would been stuck but i think i could done better if i had looked at it more in details and plus in the source of law i revised passage of bill which was part of the delegated legislation question the night before and didnt bother looking at thoroughly as i thought it wont come up which it did so i been quite unlucky with the AS , I learnt my lesson last year and started revising very early so i managed to cover all that i planned before the exam and managed to go over them again, And for the G154 questions i think they are on the mark scheme but not sure if they not on let me know i will try find the paper the teacher gave us , and for tips really just always finish off the question with reference to the question like if it asks you that did the decision in Geddes (1996) achieve the parliament intention answer like ( Its indisputable that that the parliament in passing the CAA 1981 would not of aproved the decision or intented that the defendant such as Geddes escape liability as the passing of the CAA was to codify previous common law and ensure that D such as Geddes are deterred from getting as close as geddes E.C.T )

[reb306]

(Original post by imamarouna)
I answered young offenders in the english legal system and i revised it an hour before the exam and if i hadnt i would been stuck but i think i could done better if i had looked at it more in details and plus in the source of law i revised passage of bill which was part of the delegated legislation question the night before and didnt bother looking at thoroughly as i thought it wont come up which it did so i been quite unlucky with the AS , I learnt my lesson last year and started revising very early so i managed to cover all that i planned before the exam and managed to go over them again, And for the G154 questions i think they are on the mark scheme but not sure if they not on let me know i will try find the paper the teacher gave us , and for tips really just always finish off the question with reference to the question like if it asks you that did the decision in Geddes (1996) achieve the parliament intention answer like ( Its indisputable that that the parliament in passing the CAA 1981 would not of aproved the decision or intented that the defendant such as Geddes escape liability as the passing of the CAA was to codify previous common law and ensure that D such as Geddes are deterred from getting as close as geddes E.C.T )

Oh yeah, I didnt really like all that young offenders stuff I think I missed it out, you did alright for AS though and you seem to know your stuff so I'm sure you'll get your A And I doubled checked but the questions aren't there, please if you can find the paper let me know, and thanks for that, my teacher told us a similar thing but she didn't put any rounding off conclusions in the model thing she gave us, I'm kinda just taking points from various places and putting them together to get 4 developed points for each study, I'm most worried for question 2 though I think that's where I'm going to struggle

[imamarouna]

(Original post by reb306)
Oh yeah, I didnt really like all that young offenders stuff I think I missed it out, you did alright for AS though and you seem to know your stuff so I'm sure you'll get your A And I doubled checked but the questions aren't there, please if you can find the paper let me know, and thanks for that, my teacher told us a similar thing but she didn't put any rounding off conclusions in the model thing she gave us, I'm kinda just taking points from various places and putting them together to get 4 developed points for each study, I'm most worried for question 2 though I think that's where I'm going to struggle

Hopefully i will and thanks , yes don't just follow the example answer do a bit of your own research as you never know you could find extra stuff , and i think i may found the questions

1. Discuss the importance of the decision in whybrow (source 4 page 5 special study material) to the developement of the law on attempted crimes.

2. In Source 2 (page 3 line 16 - 17 special study material) Lord bingham LJ asks. ( look in the book of what he says )

Discuss how accurately the above statement reflects the ways in which the law on the actus reus of attempted crimes has developed


3. consider whether or not conviction for an attempt crime is possible in each of the following situation

A) Author notices Bella walking away from cash dispenser holding some money which she has withdrawn. Arthur comes up behind her and tries to grab the
money. However , he slips on the pavement and falls , knocking himself unconscious

B) Charles has placed a large bet at a horse racing event. Realising that his horse is loosing , he runs onto the race track in order to distract the horses and stop the race. His plan is sucessfull and the race is abandones and charles is arrested on the race track.

C) Hanvider is to be paid a large sum of money to kill Ian, a well-known celebrity, Harvinder knowns ian is to open a new supermarket, so he sets himself up with a rifle on top of a building opposite in order to kill ian. However unknown to Harvinder , Ian has been taken ill and has had a to cancel his appearance.


Sorry for any spelling mistakes just there was too much to type haha and yes question two is very hard our teacher gave us this thing on how to answer question and i am going to see her tomorrow to explain it better

[reb306]

(Original post by imamarouna)
Hopefully i will and thanks , yes don't just follow the example answer do a bit of your own research as you never know you could find extra stuff , and i think i may found the questions

1. Discuss the importance of the decision in whybrow (source 4 page 5 special study material) to the developement of the law on attempted crimes.

2. In Source 2 (page 3 line 16 - 17 special study material) Lord bingham LJ asks. ( look in the book of what he says )

Discuss how accurately the above statement reflects the ways in which the law on the actus reus of attempted crimes has developed


3. consider whether or not conviction for an attempt crime is possible in each of the following situation

A) Author notices Bella walking away from cash dispenser holding some money which she has withdrawn. Arthur comes up behind her and tries to grab the
money. However , he slips on the pavement and falls , knocking himself unconscious

B) Charles has placed a large bet at a horse racing event. Realising that his horse is loosing , he runs onto the race track in order to distract the horses and stop the race. His plan is sucessfull and the race is abandones and charles is arrested on the race track.

C) Hanvider is to be paid a large sum of money to kill Ian, a well-known celebrity, Harvinder knowns ian is to open a new supermarket, so he sets himself up with a rifle on top of a building opposite in order to kill ian. However unknown to Harvinder , Ian has been taken ill and has had a to cancel his appearance.


Sorry for any spelling mistakes just there was too much to type haha and yes question two is very hard our teacher gave us this thing on how to answer question and i am going to see her tomorrow to explain it better

Lol thanks for that, now it's just trying to get through everything, it doesn't help that i've got C4 on thursday afternoon either -__-