Aqa Law Unit 3 15th june 2012

just to clarify on scenario 1, ive just finished the exam too and had a debate with one of my friends about the murder question, it was harry that was murdered and it was colin that murdered him and dragged him back to his house right?

I think it was Harrys friends who dragged him back to his house. Not Collin.

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

Reply 101

jamestwob

5

Anyone do Scenario 2 here? Feel like I've totally ruined my chances of getting into uni now. Any thoughts on scenario 2 if you did?

Reply 102

jackcnichols

Original post by charliekills

Just finished the exam :smile:

I'm feeling 10x more positive than last time! Although my evaluation on Non-Fatals is not as strong as the one I had prepared for General Defences, it is still a lot better than the murder evaluation I wrote in the last exam.

I answered the first scenario which I assumed was assult occasioning ABH for Alice and then S18/S20 for Jean and discussed issues of transferred malice. I had no idea what the defence could be for Gavin which startled me. However, I spoke about the automatism of Brian due to Gavin throwing the bike at him meaning he would not be liable for the injuries on Jean. Although I don't this is write, I didn't want to make a similar mistake as last time I sat the exam.

For the murder question I thought it was quite straightforward. I discussed the unlawful killing as well as causation due to Harry choking on his own vomit. I said he did not satisfy loss of self control as it was due to revenge because of the gangs earlier acts to Alice and Jean in the neighbourhood. I assumed he satified Diminished Responsiibility and said this offence would be successful.

I stupidly forgot to suggest it was due to revenge- and I knew that so well. However, couldn't LOC be accepted as the "fear of violence", as that doesn't need a qualifying trigger?|I'm probably wrong. I still went with diminished responsibility (with regard to intoxication and pre-existing problems), stating that LOC would fail, as he didn't react reasonably, by stamping on someone as they fell (similar to Van Dongen, I think). Do you think this would still be accepted?

Good luck everyone, roll on Law 4.

Reply 103

Katerzzz

Original post by jackcnichols

I stupidly forgot to suggest it was due to revenge- and I knew that so well. However, couldn't LOC be accepted as the "fear of violence", as that doesn't need a qualifying trigger?|I'm probably wrong. I still went with diminished responsibility (with regard to intoxication and pre-existing problems), stating that LOC would fail, as he didn't react reasonably, by stamping on someone as they fell (similar to Van Dongen, I think). Do you think this would still be accepted?

Good luck everyone, roll on Law 4.

I said that DR would work (even with the drink because he had pre-existing mental issues) but was rushing to finish LoC as I was watching the clock, I think I said something about the trigger being anger and how being angry at what had happened in the community would not be seen by the reasonable person asa justifiable sense of being wronged and how the reasonable person would not have reacted in the same manner in the circumstances and thus that would be why the defence would fail.
I think if you explain it well enough then it is accepted, the examiners are told to mark positively and are aware of the time pressures we are under.

Next stop: Unit 4.

Reply 104

dirtylittlesecret.

I did scenario 1 of the criminal law section and I actually found it ok. I breathed a sigh of relief when I saw the words "evaluate non fatal offences" and "murder" LOL! I knew those topics inside out so yeah.

I did the murder question first and somehow managed to write bloody 5 pages on it! I don't even know why. I found it quite straight forward and I talked about causation being an issue and that Gavin's gang's actions may have broken the chain of causation because they didn't get medical help for Harry, they just took him to bed and left him there.

Then I went onto the non fatal evaluation question and was running out of time by that point so I had to bullet point the reforms. Do they hold it against you if you use bullet points? and by this point I had 10 minutes left for the first question and I was going mad writing. I said that Gavin assaulted Alice and now I know it was supposed to be ABH, damn :frown:

and I didn't even write any defence for Gavin, wth could it have been? for Gavin and Jean again I had to use bullet points! mentioned GBH section 20 and transferred malice and then the mens rea.

slightly worried now :frown:

how is everyone else feeling about it?

Reply 105

charliekills

1

Original post by HanSouthwood

I think it was Harrys friends who dragged him back to his house. Not Collin.

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

Yes, this is what I assumed too. I suggested Colin may argue a break in the chain of causation as the friends should have seeked medical help not just leaving their friend lying with multiple injuries but Majoram states to consider a range of possibilities which are reasonable and not daft.

Reply 106

jackcnichols

Original post by Katerzzz

I said that DR would work (even with the drink because he had pre-existing mental issues) but was rushing to finish LoC as I was watching the clock, I think I said something about the trigger being anger and how being angry at what had happened in the community would not be seen by the reasonable person asa justifiable sense of being wronged and how the reasonable person would not have reacted in the same manner in the circumstances and thus that would be why the defence would fail.
I think if you explain it well enough then it is accepted, the examiners are told to mark positively and are aware of the time pressures we are under.

Next stop: Unit 4.

Yeah, I said it would be successful and used Dietschman (not sure on spelling) to justify it. I only need a low C to get a B for the full course, so hopefully I can scrape that.

Reply 107

Katerzzz

Original post by dirtylittlesecret.

I did scenario 1 of the criminal law section and I actually found it ok. I breathed a sigh of relief when I saw the words "evaluate non fatal offences" and "murder" LOL! I knew those topics inside out so yeah.

I did the murder question first and somehow managed to write bloody 5 pages on it! I don't even know why. I found it quite straight forward and I talked about causation being an issue and that Gavin's gang's actions may have broken the chain of causation because they didn't get medical help for Harry, they just took him to bed and left him there.

Then I went onto the non fatal evaluation question and was running out of time by that point so I had to bullet point the reforms. Do they hold it against you if you use bullet points? and by this point I had 10 minutes left for the first question and I was going mad writing. I said that Gavin assaulted Alice and now I know it was supposed to be ABH, damn :frown:

and I didn't even write any defence for Gavin, wth could it have been? for Gavin and Jean again I had to use bullet points! mentioned GBH section 20 and transferred malice and then the mens rea.

slightly worried now :frown:

how is everyone else feeling about it?

Rule number one: DON'T PANIC :smile:

We on here are all speculating, the only people who know the right answers and what we should've put are the minions at AQA.

Secondly, there was no defence for Gavin. Odd, I know, but I read scenario 1 six times and could not find any defence for Gavin. All the people in my exam who done scenario 1 said the same thing; no defence for Gavin.

And bullet-pointing is good because it shows the examiner you haven't just given up or you haven't just stopped writing because you've got a minute left and think fook it I can't write anymore. The examiner will see what you would've put had you had the extra time and may award you marks. Examiners are told to be positive, taking into account what is there rather than criticizing and bashing what isn't.

Relax, we can't do anything about it now, it's in the past. You can't let this affect other exams you have :smile:

Good luck!

Reply 108

Katerzzz

Original post by jackcnichols

Yeah, I said it would be successful and used Dietschman (not sure on spelling) to justify it. I only need a low C to get a B for the full course, so hopefully I can scrape that.

I need an A but my AS grade was only a mark off an A so hopefully with this exam and next week's I'll push that B over the line!

Reply 109

Executioner

1

I didn't put ABH for Garvin's incident to Alice. I just put assault :s
I also put Garvin could try to plead innocent because he was unaware of Alice's pre-existing condition, however, it was reasonably forseeable given her age.
:s-smilie:

Reply 110

Antonton

I only wrote about diminished responsibility and intoxication with regards to the murder... how many marks do you lose if you miss out loss of control? :s-smilie:

Reply 111

Executioner

1

In the last offences question I only wrote the criticisms, I didn't have time to write the reforms. How many marks would I lose?

Reply 112

dirtylittlesecret.

Original post by Executioner

In the last offences question I only wrote the criticisms, I didn't have time to write the reforms. How many marks would I lose?

I did that once in my mock exam and my criticisms were actually all good but as I missed out the reforms I only got a D in that essay. don't wanna scare you though! that was my teacher marking it :smile:

Reply 113

Antonton

I honestly don't see how its feasibly possible to include both the partial defences... I struggled with time so much :/. I hope I don't drop to much marks for not including the loss of control.

Reply 114

Hannah578

I did scenaro two.
Gutted that NFO reform came up, I only knew defences. Im finding law so hard and my teacher hasnt even taught us unit 4! Which is next week. Not gonna be possible to get a D let alone a B I dont think. Ahhhh :frown:

Reply 115

Hannah578

Original post by jamestwob

Anyone do Scenario 2 here? Feel like I've totally ruined my chances of getting into uni now. Any thoughts on scenario 2 if you did?