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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I did scenario one and i got:

    1. Theft of the papers-pretty straight forward

    2. Theft of the £20 000 from Anna
    Appropriation- volunatarily given the money issue (Rv Hinks)
    Property-no issues
    Belonging to another-was given for a specific reason by anna
    Dishonest-he did believe he was 'entitled to money'
    Ipd-no issues

    3. Buglary i did 91a and 91b for the theft and GBH

    I didnt do robbery(didnt think he used force in order to steal)-but i believe you can put this it just wouldn't satisfy the in order to steal bit.

    Briefly mentioned blackmail because in the scenario it was only a line

    For question 2
    1.fraud by false rep-pretty straight forward

    2.criminal damage of the window and furniture + aggravated

    3. I put criminal damage for Dan as well. + lawful excuse. didn't put arson for it because he didn't create the fire himself.

    I mentioned intoxication for the whiskeys

    Seems i screwed up pretty bad
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valesker)
    That definitely wasn't scenario 2
    Scenario 2 question 1 was: theft of the money, burglary 91a and 91b for the trespassing and stealing from the part building, robbery for the use of force against Fatima and he could have raised duress but it would have failed for criminal association.Question 2 had no intoxication, it was theft of the money, theft of the card, fraud of the card and obtaining services
    Oops I know. I did scenario 1. Didn't think when writing it here


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Humerashaikhh)
    I did scenario one and i got:

    1. Theft of the papers-pretty straight forward

    2. Theft of the £20 000 from Anna
    Appropriation- consent issue
    Property-no issues
    Belonging to another-was given for a specific reason by anna
    Dishonest-he did believe he was 'entitled to money'
    Ipd-no issues

    3. Buglary i did 91a and 91b for the theft and GBH

    I didnt do robbery(didnt think he used force in order to steal)
    Briefly mentioned blackmail because in the scenario it was only a line

    For question 2
    1.fraud by false rep
    -pretty straight forward

    2.criminal damage of the window and furniture + aggravated

    3. I put crimjnal damage for Dan aswell. + lawful excuse

    I mentioned intox

    Seems i screwed up pretty bad

    Was the 20,000 not false by false rep?? That's what I put omg
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by axs)
    Was the 20,000 not false by false rep?? That's what I put omg
    personally i put fraud by false representation for saying that he's going to develop the software if Anna gives him money and that he lied about that and then spent it on the car. and i put fraud by false rep for the fact that he said that the papers were his own.

    so you're not wrong. he did make a false rep that he was going to develop the software if anna gave him the money.

    i just dealt with the 20 000 also as a theft singularly
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OrdinaryStudent)
    yeah lol most people do property, hope it went well though
    Cheers man
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Humerashaikhh)
    personally i put fraud by false representation for saying that he's going to develop the software if Anna gives him money and that he lied about that and then spent it on the car. and i put fraud by false rep for the fact that he said that the papers were his own.

    so you're not wrong. he did make a false rep that he was going to develop the software if anna gave him the money.

    i just dealt with the 20 000 also as a theft singularly
    Wasn't Anna part of question 2


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rust Cohle)
    Wasn't Anna part of question 2


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    i do believe you maybe are right now that i think about it.
    I don't remember what the question said. Because if it was just Tom then i guess i did it wrong then.

    god dammit
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Humerashaikhh)
    i do believe you maybe are right now that i think about it.
    I don't remember what the question said. Because if it was just Tom then i guess i did it wrong then.

    god dammit
    its fine dont be too worried, examiners are not stupid im sure they will understand!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone do tort scenario 1
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OrdinaryStudent)
    its fine dont be too worried, examiners are not stupid im sure they will understand!!
    do you think so?

    for that question i only have burglary and theft now because the theft of the money is irrelevant.

    is that marked as two potential content then?

    idk how this works
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Glennyg1)
    Did anyone do tort scenario 1
    I did! Thought it was pretty easy to be honest.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone add obtaining services dishonestly in Q1 as well as fraud by false rep due to it being Anna's job?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I did criminal law scenario 1:

    Please tell me if you identified the same offences!!

    Q1. Burglary s9 (1) (a) and s 9 (1) (b)
    Blackmail
    Theft

    Q2. Harry to Anna:
    Fraud by false representation
    Fraud by obtaining services distinctly ( i'm unsure if i got this correct , i think it should have been theft of the £20,000) What do you guys think?
    Defense of intoxication

    Tom to Harry:
    basic criminal damage, aggravated criminal damage and arson

    Dan to Harry:
    Basic criminal damage, defense of lawful excuse.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Tort was a pretty good paper, ended up going with scenario 2.

    Law and morals was great too
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sunnyrebecca)
    Did anyone add obtaining services dishonestly in Q1 as well as fraud by false rep due to it being Anna's job?

    Yeh I did, but now i'm reevaluating it. i think it may have been theft of the money and also fraud by false representation.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xFloody)
    Tort was a pretty good paper, ended up going with scenario 2.

    Law and morals was great too
    I thought scenario 2 looked awful so went with 1 what was on it??
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Studybuddy5721)
    I did criminal law scenario 1:

    Please tell me if you identified the same offences!!

    Q1. Burglary s9 (1) (a) and s 9 (1) (b)
    Blackmail
    Theft

    Q2. Harry to Anna:
    Fraud by false representation
    Fraud by obtaining services distinctly ( i'm unsure if i got this correct , i think it should have been theft of the £20,000) What do you guys think?
    Defense of intoxication

    Tom to Harry:
    basic criminal damage, aggravated criminal damage and arson

    Dan to Harry:
    Basic criminal damage, defense of lawful excuse.
    I did the exact same just theft instead of OSD but it seems like you basically got the same as me and all my law group
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah well I included all 3 so hopefully one of them is right hahaha!
    Now thinking about it, I think it's theft because they clearly put the fact that Harry believed 'he felt he was entitled' to the money received and therefore wanting us to use S2(1)(a) under Dishonestly
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ciarasimpson29)
    I did! Thought it was pretty easy to be honest.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Did you do

    Negligent mistatments
    General rules of negligence
    Psychiatric injury

    Private nuisance
    Private nuisance
    Rylands v fletcher
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Glennyg1)
    Did you do

    Negligent mistatments
    General rules of negligence
    Psychiatric injury

    Private nuisance
    Private nuisance
    Rylands v fletcher
    Yeah I did that exactly


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?

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

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