Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _Alicetindale)
    How did Jayson lose his control ?? And who had dr??
    Jayson lost his self control because during the time Ivo was running away he didn't have time to plan revenge/retaliation and so he was brooding over the the fact that Ivo was laughing at him because Kelysie threatened to take the children away as in R v Clinton (2012) so the 2nd test was satisfied and also as in R v Ahluwalia because LOSC no longer needs to be sudden the first test was satisfied.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I did scenario 2 and missed out intoxication and self defence because of time will I still be able to get a good grade??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I did scenario 2 and I am so confused how some people got the answers they did.
    For the OAPA;
    Battery,and s20/s18 discussion in regards to wound and discussion of self defence/prevention of crime/protection of another under s3 CLA 1967
    Then the question specifically says murder so some discussion of murder via omission HAS to occur with a potential discussion of Loss of control
    Unlawful act was assault and the main discussion based around the causation issues. Mentioning intoxication was reaching for marks because we are not told drinking or drug taking occurred. Just because they were at a bar does not mean drinks were consumed. Some like tap water. Ngl i mentioned it sort of
    Hope everyone did well and lets smash unit 4!
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by axs)
    I did scenario 2 and missed out intoxication and self defence because of time will I still be able to get a good grade??
    Didn't do this scenario, but doesn't affect the grade really you can still get 21/25.. (
    A)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NHM)
    Didn't do this scenario, but doesn't affect the grade really you can still get 21/25.. (
    A)

    Ugh I don't think I'll get that I also didn't spot the causation issue in the unlawful act part
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by axs)
    I did scenario 2 and missed out intoxication and self defence because of time will I still be able to get a good grade??
    It never specified anywhere in the scenario that anyone was drinking so to put intoxication wouldn't be necessary. Self defence was to be mentioned for Helen but even if you didn't do it you can still get a maximum of 21 marks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I didn't mention self defence in regards to Adam pushing Calvin in Scenario 1, will this really affect my mark?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Scenario 1:

    Q1: ABH (battery), GBH s20 (causation issue, 3rd party), consent (but will fail) and assault (not liable- no immediate fear)

    Q2: murder with actus reus causation issue and mens rea(direct expressed malice aforethought)

    Diminished responsibility based on ADS

    gross negliegence- liable

    Could i still get good marks as i missed out self defence in Q1?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XxShivani)
    No I failed it, what did u do?
    I let her have it because her it was necessary and proportionate and I was kind of stressing out at the time, I'm not really sure on the answer haha!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katherine9609)
    It never specified anywhere in the scenario that anyone was drinking so to put intoxication wouldn't be necessary. Self defence was to be mentioned for Helen but even if you didn't do it you can still get a maximum of 21 marks
    It did mention that they had met at a nearby bar, so I think you would be credited for mentioning intoxication, I didn't go into detail but just briefly outlined it and said that from the information from the case study it is a possibility she may have been intoxicated.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i did scenario 1 but didnt have time to write down the defences, i would have rather missed those out than missed out murder or GNM. how much of a difference will this make???
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brittttt)
    i did scenario 1 but didnt have time to write down the defences, i would have rather missed those out than missed out murder or GNM. how much of a difference will this make???
    Without defences you're looking at a maximum of 21/25
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katherine9609)
    Without defences you're looking at a maximum of 21/25
    As I only did consent what's the maximum marks I could get?
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RHJ29)
    I did scenario 2 and I am so confused how some people got the answers they did.
    For the OAPA;
    Battery,and s20/s18 discussion in regards to wound and discussion of self defence/prevention of crime/protection of another under s3 CLA 1967
    Then the question specifically says murder so some discussion of murder via omission HAS to occur with a potential discussion of Loss of control
    Unlawful act was assault and the main discussion based around the causation issues. Mentioning intoxication was reaching for marks because we are not told drinking or drug taking occurred. Just because they were at a bar does not mean drinks were consumed. Some like tap water. Ngl i mentioned it sort of
    Hope everyone did well and lets smash unit 4!
    Should have done scenario 1 😉
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Which question had the A03 marks?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Non fatals (Q1 and Q4)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Why are boundaries so high for this paper? 61 for an A last year seems extremly high, even to get a C at 51 is quite high if
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What question do we think are going to come up in LAW04 Tort?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EllieLangdon)
    I chose scenario two, and did this:

    2 counts of assault from Genna to Helen - the verbal threat, and the act of opening the windows and doors as the second type.

    I then discussed battery and s47 for the kick, and weighed up that if there was bruising it would probably be s47. And s20 wounding for the deep forehead cut because for it to be deep I assumed that meant the second layer of skin would have been groken, but I did mention this was required.

    For Ivo, Lucas, and Jayson I said yes Jayson could be guilty of murder due to his owing Ivo a duty of care because he created a dagerous situation (co-created) and that it was his ommission which was a more than more than minimal cause of death.

    For Lucas I did subjective reckless manslaughter because I thought that the dangerous act required in UAM had to be physical, and he was only chasing him, and hadnt actually used the knife, but I explained that this was why I made that choice.

    I didn't do defences in either question.


    What question do we think are going to come up in LAW04 Tort?
    Nuisance private and public + ruling in Rylands it has been up every single year! (Certain)

    Essay wise - Morality, BCI and Justice.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Does it matter if for Q5 scenario 2 I discussed the unlawful act manslaughter with Lucas first and then went on to Jayson etc??
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.