Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

OCR A2 LAW G153 Criminal Law 1 - June 2013

Scroll to see replies

Reply 780

qr95

If causation doesnt come up as an essay iv failed

Reply 781

A sheesh

Original post by MonsterMorris

Hasan and Valderrama Vega are completely different legal points. The decision in Valderrama Vega is that there has to be threats of death or serious injury. Lesser threats do no provide a defence. However, provided that there are serious threats, then the cumulative effect of the threats as a whole can be considered.

Do u know why bowen was not given duress though his family n himself were threatened seriously? I don't understand

Reply 782

fats_12

Original post by A sheesh

Do u know why bowen was not given duress though his family n himself were threatened seriously? I don't understand

Hope this helps
ImageUploadedByStudent Room1370379192.861477.jpg

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 783

Evolutionism

Original post by fats_12

Hope this helps
ImageUploadedByStudent Room1370379192.861477.jpg

Posted from TSR Mobile

[Source: OCR Criminal Law, Sue Teal]
And also it comes under the two-part test set in Graham (1982),
- 'Was the defendant compelled to act as he did because he reasonably believed he had good cause to fear serious injury or death?' - Subjective
- 'Would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the accused, have responded in the same way?' - Objective

In Bowen (1996) it was decided that the circumstances that could be considered are: age, pregnancy, serious physical disability, a recognised mental illness or psychiatric disorder and gender. A recognised mental illness or psychiatric disorder does not include low IQ (as stated by the above poster).

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 784

fats_12

Original post by Evolutionism

[Source: OCR Criminal Law, Sue Teal]
And also it comes under the two-part test set in Graham (1982),
- 'Was the defendant compelled to act as he did because he reasonably believed he had good cause to fear serious injury or death?' - Subjective
- 'Would a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the accused, have responded in the same way?' - Objective

In Bowen (1996) it was decided that the relevant circumstances are: age, pregnancy, serious physical disability, a recognised mental illness or psychiatric disorder and gender. A recognised mental illness or psychiatric disorder does not include low IQ (as stated by the above poster).

Were those factors taken into account in Bowen? My teachers pretty certain Duress is going to pop up, hence I'm revising it well as we done an essay plan today

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 785

Evolutionism

Original post by fats_12

Were those factors taken into account in Bowen? My teachers pretty certain Duress is going to pop up, hence I'm revising it well as we done an essay plan today

Posted from TSR Mobile

Fuller extract from the textbook:
"In Bowen it was accepted that the following could be relevant
Age: very young people and the very old could be more susceptible to threats
Pregnancy: there is the additional fear for the safety of the unborn child
Serious physical disability: this could make it more difficult for the defendant to protect himself.
Recognised mental illness or psychiatric disorder: this could include post-traumatic stress disorder or any other disorder which meant that a person might be more susceptible to threats. This did not include a low IQ.
Gender: although the Court of Appeal thought many women might have as much moral courage as men."
Unfortunately the textbook seems to only provide this much.

EDIT: If it helps i also found a section on this case in another textbook, Ninth Edition, Criminal Law, Catherine Elliott and Frances Quinn.
'In R v Bowen (1996) the defendant was accused of obtaining services by deception, having dishonestly obtained electrical goods on credit. in his defence he argued that throughout he had been acting under duress, as two men had threatened to attack him and his family with petrol bombs if he did not obtain the goods for them. The trial judge directed the jury members that, in applying the objective limb of the Graham test, they could take into account the age and sex of the defendant. On appeal it was argued that the jury should also have been directed to take into account his very low IQ. The appeal was rejected. The Court of Appeal stated that the mere fact that an accused is pliable, vulnerable, timid or susceptible to threats does not mean these are characteristics which can be invested in the reasonable person. On the other hand, if a defendant is within a category of persons whom the jury might think less able to resist pressure than people not within that category - such as being of a certain age or sex or suffering from a serious physical disability, recognised mental illness or psychiatric condition (including a post-traumatic stress disorder) - then this could be treated as a characteristic of the reasonable person. A low IQ, short of mental impairment or mental defectiveness, cannot be treated as such a characteristic'

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 786

breakeven

Original post by Converse Rocker

Do you include much else other than all the exceptions e.g voluntary assumption of care, creating a dangerous situation etc? Apart from statutory duties I'm struggling to think what else you'd put in.

Yes, general rule, statute and exceptions applying to the question throughout and using case law. Its quite an easy essay most of the time. It's usually based around criticisms or problems with the law. Desperate for it to come up! :biggrin:

Reply 787

MonsterMorris

Original post by Converse Rocker

You also talk about the duty of doctors, how they can stop feeding a patient if it was in his best interests, and this was decided in Airedale v Bland where V was in a persistent vegatitve state. Also in the OCR textbook it talks a little about involuntary manslaughter, just saying how gross negligence manslaughter is committed by an omission.

Reply 788

Ben1695

How ready are people for this exam? I'm feeling ok provided I get a bit of luck. Only need 68 for an A so that is an advantage.

Reply 789

ArsenalWenger

Original post by Ben1695

How ready are people for this exam? I'm feeling ok provided I get a bit of luck. Only need 68 for an A so that is an advantage.

Snap. I also need 68 to secure my A. Im nowhere near ready but hopefully I can get 68 atleast. U ready?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 790

Ben1695

Original post by ArsenalWenger

Snap. I also need 68 to secure my A. Im nowhere near ready but hopefully I can get 68 atleast. U ready?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Ok, provided I get a little luck. Which topics do you know well enough to write out now?

Reply 791

feelinginfinite

I did feel ready but I think I've reached a point where I'm getting so anxious and stressed that I'm forgetting simple things... All day tomorrow I'm spending looking through markschemes and practising writing essays

I'll do well if the paper includes a Q1 duress/attempts, a Q2 non fatal OAP/ theft/ invol manslaughter, and a Q3 insanity auto/ theft/ non fatal OAP.
If not, I'll struggle to get around 75ums/more (what I think I'll need after my resit)

Reply 792

Fward

Not looking forward to this exam at all - I'm just hoping some nice topics come up, and I don't have a complete mind blank in the exam like last time :/

Reply 793

Ben1695

Original post by feelinginfinite

I feel the same, attempts/duress/causation and consent would be the perfect essay. Q2 I need theft or assaults to come up and Q3 I would hope for duress, assaults, insanity/automatism, or theft, robbery or burglary, and causation

Reply 794

ArsenalWenger

Original post by Ben1695

Ok, provided I get a little luck. Which topics do you know well enough to write out now?

Theft robbery burglary is my strong point. Involuntary man, gross negligence mans and omissions are quite decent too. Goin over attempts atm. Urself?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 795

curtisblackham

Original post by ArsenalWenger

Theft robbery burglary is my strong point. Involuntary man, gross negligence mans and omissions are quite decent too. Goin over attempts atm. Urself?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I'm totally missing out murder and manslaughter :/ haha risky but I should still be able to answer the rest of the paper fingers crossed!

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 796

Fward

Original post by Ben1695

How ready are people for this exam? I'm feeling ok provided I get a bit of luck. Only need 68 for an A so that is an advantage.

Original post by ArsenalWenger

Snap. I also need 68 to secure my A. Im nowhere near ready but hopefully I can get 68 atleast. U ready?

Posted from TSR Mobile

You 2 are so lucky you only need 68, I need 84 to get my A - fingers crossed :s-smilie:

Reply 797

Ben1695

Original post by ArsenalWenger

Theft robbery burglary is my strong point. Involuntary man, gross negligence mans and omissions are quite decent too. Goin over attempts atm. Urself?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Good on Attempts, Duress, Causation, Consent, Theft, Robbery and Burglary. Omissions is easy and not bad on non fatal OAPA. Its risky but I'm considering leaving out murder, and invol manslaughter