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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tony102)
    what is the likelihood of duress of circumstances coming up? I've never seen it in a scenario before
    Low, even if it does just use normal duress knowledge and just add Conway on
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    One thing I dislike about this unit is that the potential contents can be unpredictable when it comes to possible combinations of theft/false rep/obtaining services/making off.

    Is cash money classed a personal property as far as AQA is concerned?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rust Cohle)
    One thing I dislike about this unit is that the potential contents can be unpredictable when it comes to possible combinations of theft/false rep/obtaining services/making off.

    Is cash money classed a personal property as far as AQA is concerned?
    yes, however s4 states that "money" is it's own category so this is much easier to show.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    is anyone going to be just revising the law and morality essay? How big of a risk do you think this is?

    Also for Criminal damage under property we use the same cases for theft right? And finally how would you properly use the case of Kelly?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey guys can anyone tell me recent news relating to any morality issues for unit 4?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OrdinaryStudent)
    is anyone going to be just revising the law and morality essay? How big of a risk do you think this is?

    Also for Criminal damage under property we use the same cases for theft right? And finally how would you properly use the case of Kelly?
    1. Probably not
    2. Along with BCI, it's one of the less risky answers to solely revise
    3. I assume you mean in relation to property. Yeah you can use Oxford v Moss for example, though chances are you wont need it as s10(1) CDA states that property must be intangible. S10(2) deals with ownership too.
    4. Body parts may = property only if it could be said that it "accquired different attributes by the virtue of the application of skill".

    I think the premise here is that a dead body is just a dead body. It's a human so you can't own it. But it if's an more than that, like say a mummy, that's used for exhibition in museums or an organ that's used for scientific pursuits, then it becomes property.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Sorry if this has already been asked) Does anyone have any tort predictions? I hope economic loss comes up, I find that the easiest
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    How sure are people that law and morality is going to come up? I really want to just revise this topic but I don't know if it's too big of a risk, especially after unit 3 living up to the prediction of non-Fatals, aqa may not want to be nice in that respect again
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    what are the chances of law and morality coming up please????
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rust Cohle)
    1. Probably not
    2. Along with BCI, it's one of the less risky answers to solely revise
    3. I assume you mean in relation to property. Yeah you can use Oxford v Moss for example, though chances are you wont need it as s10(1) CDA states that property must be intangible. S10(2) deals with ownership too.
    4. Body parts may = property only if it could be said that it "accquired different attributes by the virtue of the application of skill".

    I think the premise here is that a dead body is just a dead body. It's a human so you can't own it. But it if's an more than that, like say a mummy, that's used for exhibition in museums or an organ that's used for scientific pursuits, then it becomes property.
    We've only been taught morality, justice and fault.

    Also for property the cases I have are : Oxford vs Moss, Kelly and Marshall. The cases are very specific in some regards so how would you do the property section? Would you link back to the definition given by the statue instead? e.g. intangible, real, personal etc
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Also for unit 3 reforms - did anyone realise they asked specifically only for OAPA 1861 ?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OrdinaryStudent)
    Also for unit 3 reforms - did anyone realise they asked specifically only for OAPA 1861 ?
    They asked for non fatals so s.47,s.20 and s.18!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Glennyg1)
    what are the chances of law and morality coming up please????
    I'd say it's almost certain to come up (99%)
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NHM)
    I'd say it's almost certain to come up (99%)
    which concepts are you going be memorising?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Out of all of the offences which are specific intent and which are basic intent?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OSFC98)
    Does it matter if for Q5 scenario 2 I discussed the unlawful act manslaughter with Lucas first and then went on to Jayson etc??
    Nah, you're fine
    Offline

    2
    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??
    You're fine for missing out intoxication. The fact that it took place by a bar was only briefly mentioned so I HIGHLY doubt it will appear on the mark scheme as a full potential content, just worthy of credit.

    If you missed out self defence for the second question that's a little more significant because it was a pretty major part of the scenario so is likely to be a potential content. However, I believe you can still get up to 20/21 marks, based on other comments here??
    Offline

    2
    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!
    Phew, I wrote about the exact same things you mentioned. I even did a brief mention of intoxication same as you: pretty sure it will be worthy of some credit even though it's not a potential content because otherwise I don't see why they'd mention they were at a bar haha!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPFM)
    Out of all of the offences which are specific intent and which are basic intent?
    You should know this by know but specific intent crimes specifically require intention. Basic intent allows for intent or recklessness. The only basics in unit 4 are basic criminal damage and arson
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OrdinaryStudent)
    We've only been taught morality, justice and fault.

    Also for property the cases I have are : Oxford vs Moss, Kelly and Marshall. The cases are very specific in some regards so how would you do the property section? Would you link back to the definition given by the statue instead? e.g. intangible, real, personal etc
    Just state that property must be tangible as per s10(1) and that property in question (e.g. bike, cash, light bulb, kitchen sink) all constitute that. Mention the type of property just to be safe but it doesn't seem to have any effect on answer (based on June 13 Rosa George criminal damage in relation to an electrical socket).
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.