AQA unit 3 exam 12th June 2018 unofficial markscheme.

So how did everyone find it?

Scenario 1:

1. Assault (Ellie to Beth)
S20 OAPA 1861 (Beth to Ellie)
S18 OAPA 1862 (Beth to Ellie)
Defence of self defence

2. Go through murder then not as didn’t intend.
Vol manslaughter LofC and DR
Guilty of LofC using anger trigger
DR - depression possible medical condition

3. Reforms - MR issues on intention, ambiguous wording, LofC qualifying triggers hard to understand

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

mohammed786islam

Omg I answered scenario one but did s47 ABH (battery occassioning abh) instead of s20 :frown:

as i thought the scar to the face was not really serious. do u think i would get marks?

Reply 2

Bekel

Original post by mohammed786islam

Omg I answered scenario one but did s47 ABH (battery occassioning abh) instead of s20 :frown:

as i thought the scar to the face was not really serious. do u think i would get marks?

I think it’s positive marking! I’ve seen people have put ABH as well so if you’ve done it detailed and applied correctly you should get some marks!

Scars left damage to the face which can be under s18 as GBH or really serious harm

Reply 3

Nimra786

Original post by mohammed786islam

Omg I answered scenario one but did s47 ABH (battery occassioning abh) instead of s20 :frown:

as i thought the scar to the face was not really serious. do u think i would get marks?

You would still get marks as you must have explained it well

Reply 4

Nimra786

Original post by Bekel

For the mens rea for murder i wrote oblique intention, would i still get marks?

Reply 5

EllieH12345

I said that Beth’s injuries to Ellie was also ABH. I didn’t really consider scarring to be permanent disfigurement. The case of DPP v K was based on scarring and the defendant was charged with ABH so I based it off of that. Hope I haven’t messed it all up :frown:

Reply 6

Bekel

Original post by Nimra786

For the mens rea for murder i wrote oblique intention, would i still get marks?

Yeah so murder you’d go through intention and state direct and indirect intent but wouldn’t say indirect as he didn’t virtually foresee or appreciate that throwing a brick would cause the death.

Reply 7

Higuys24

Was it public self defence or mistaken? I wrote public as there was an imminent threat to herself

Reply 8

Higuys24

Also I think you need to discuss whether it was s47 and s20. Didn’t do s18 as it wasn’t really bad

Reply 9

Nimra786

Original post by Bekel

Did you state that she would get the defence of self defence or not ?

Reply 10

Bekel

Original post by Nimra786

Did you state that she would get the defence of self defence or not ?

Yes I said she would

Reply 11

ameliabio

Did anyone use the principle of transfer of malice in scenario 1, question 1?
I saw on twitter someone put that there could be transfer of malice for Ellie to Beth assault, as she intended to scare Alison (with her insults and coffee) yet scared Beth instead?

I didn't write it but now I'm worried...

Reply 12

mohammed786islam

Original post by Higuys24

Also I think you need to discuss whether it was s47 and s20. Didn’t do s18 as it wasn’t really bad

I only managed to dicuss s47 didnt think about s20 at the time :angry:

Reply 13

mohammed786islam

I applied everything for loss of control well i think i did but i ran out of time and didnt have time to write how he may have acted out of revenege and only wrote one sentence about sexual infidelity? would i still get marks?
Scenario 1:

1. Assault (Ellie to Beth)
S20 OAPA 1861 (Beth to Ellie)
S18 OAPA 1862 (Beth to Ellie)
Defence of self defence

2. Go through murder then not as didn’t intend.
Vol manslaughter LofC and DR
Guilty of LofC using anger trigger
DR - depression possible medical condition

3. Reforms - MR issues on intention, ambiguous wording, LofC qualifying triggers hard to understand

Reply 14

Emmaudofia14

Anyone got anything for scenario 2???

Reply 15

mohammed786islam

For the evaluation - u could talk about the serious harm rule (mr - how anyone who commits gbh could be in the same position as a serial killer), mention the criticism about the ar (reasonable creature) + the reform about it becoming more clear), state the reclassification of the defence e.g. first degree, second degree (reckless killing),
for voluntary manslaughter - u could mention how dm requires a reverse burden of proof - possibler reform is to reverse it back to crown + loss of control criticisms regarding sexual infidelity e.g. Clinton case causes confusion

Reply 16

Emmaudofia14

Because i got:
04 - s18/20 Franco - Gianna (defence of intoxication and consent)
- s20 Franco to Harriet

05 - Unlawful act manslaughter Gross negligence manslaughter

However, I didn't mention Gross Negligence manslaughter,but i applied the crap out of unlawful act manslaughter how many marks would i have lost?

Reply 17

username3247096

Scenario 2

1:
- Battery; ABH
- Wounding s.20 / s.18 (discuss both sections)
- Transferred malice
- Consent (lawful exception: rough horseplay)
- Intoxication

2:
- Unlawful act manslaughter
- Gross negligence manslaughter
- Potentially mention thin skull rule
- New intervening act of other thief

Reply 18

mohammed786islam

I only managed to write enough points about murder but only mentioned 2 criticisms and 2 reforms for involuntary - am i able to get a sound answer?

Reply 19

eagrimbleby

i also made this mistake of doing uam and not gnm as well which is also a seperate potential content. i looked at last years paper and you were rewarded a strong clear for doing one only which gave you a maximum of 13 marks so i would say you would achieve somehting similar to that.