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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Am I the only one that did Involuntary Manslaughter?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys i did question 1.

    For part a i used consent but some of my classmates wrote self defence.
    For part b, i used the defence of insanity but did mention DR briefly at the end. Is that right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ^ i used consent too. What offence did you go for in the first one?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i explained both the possibilities of it being s20 and s18, but decided overall on s20. I've got a feeling that was wrong but oh well lol you?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BryonieIV)
    What other defence did you do?

    I could only think of consent.
    I did Scenario 1 too.

    Found the first part really easy. The second part I evaluated both partial defences to murder and also mentioned a possibility of self defense.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I can't see self-defence as a defence. Is it for the guy who punched? Or the guy who stabbed?

    I immediately thought horseplay when I read about the whole 'boxing match' and being encouraged by 'rowdy' mates. So consent.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I immediately thought horseplay when I read about the whole 'boxing match' and being encouraged by 'rowdy' mates. So consent.
    Yep same here.

    The fact that part c involved reforms on voluntary manslaughter i.e. diminished responsibility and provocation, led me to believe that they couldn't possibly want us to talk about it again in part a so i decided to go for insanity as a defence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BryonieIV)
    I did offences: s47 ABH and S.20 (though I'm kind of thinking it was S.18 now. Though, I did write about intention a lot, so hopefully I've sort of covered where s.18 would come in.) And then the only defence I could think of was consent, as in horseplay.
    I did the same thing. I'm pretty certain that the question was going for consent as there is the "horseplay" element and they may have tried to throw people with the "boxing" thing!

    I went for either s18 or s20 but explained both just incase. The first one was ABH (supported by battery)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bounce.)
    i explained both the possibilities of it being s20 and s18, but decided overall on s20. I've got a feeling that was wrong but oh well lol you?
    I did the same thing.

    I think I did well on B & C i'm just worried about the A question
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rainbow1992)
    I did the same thing.

    I think I did well on B & C i'm just worried about the A question
    Same here!

    Question B and C, I wrote everything I had to write. I thought the guy in B had a strong plea for both provocation and diminished responsibility, so there was quite a bit to write for them.

    Question C went well. I wrote about the MLS + reforms, intent + reforms, self-denfence + reforms, provocation + reforms, DR + reforms. So I think I basically covered everything!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So what mark out of 75 do we think will be needed for an A
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's out of 80 (5marks for QWC) so should be a minimum of 64 marks i reckon
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ^ wow that low?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Now we just have to wait until March for the results.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    did question 2, epic fail.

    definately resitting but i'm not too worried about resitting cause i have good notes i just didn't give myself enough time to use them

    we started tort today as well and it looks like it's gunna be just as boring as it was in AS ... woooo ...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I can't wait till Marchhh I want to know now! lol

    Oh 1 more thing. So what was the defence for 1a? because some of you said self defence, was that regarding that girls injuries (cant remember names lol) because I talked about consent in relation to the first guys injuries.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rainbow1992)
    I can't wait till Marchhh I want to know now! lol

    Oh 1 more thing. So what was the defence for 1a? because some of you said self defence, was that regarding that girls injuries (cant remember names lol) because I talked about consent in relation to the first guys injuries.
    The defence was consent. I said it would fail in relation to it being a fight as you cant consent to fighting and it wasnt a proper boxing match. Others say it is consent but with horseplay. I think the scenario was beyond horseplay ... swelling .. knife being pulled ... thats an all out blatent fight to me.

    So my opinion .. consent but fails on grounds of fighting.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    i did question 1, ive probably ballsed it up.

    i put ABH, then S.20 for the stabbing cus its a wound then i talked about transferred malice

    then i talked about the possibility of consent in horseplay talking about richarson and irwin...probabl not right

    then i put a sentence about the dude who stabbed not being able to use self defence because it was excessive force


    murder question was pretty easy, i was umming and ahhing between express and implied malice but i chose implied in the end because pushing someone off a rail doesnt neccesairly mean intention to kill does it? agh i'm so confuseddd

    then i forgot to write about foresight of consequences to i had to go back and do it in the last 5 minutes haha

    as for evaluation, i screwed up.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loopylawrence)
    The defence was consent. I said it would fail in relation to it being a fight as you cant consent to fighting and it wasnt a proper boxing match. Others say it is consent but with horseplay. I think the scenario was beyond horseplay ... swelling .. knife being pulled ... thats an all out blatent fight to me.

    So my opinion .. consent but fails on grounds of fighting.
    Oh OK thanks, lol i was getting confused. I can't remember exactly what I put but I did talk about consent lol
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by No Motivation!)
    i did question 1, ive probably ballsed it up.

    i put ABH, then S.20 for the stabbing cus its a wound then i talked about transferred malice

    then i talked about the possibility of consent in horseplay talking about richarson and irwin...probabl not right

    then i put a sentence about the dude who stabbed not being able to use self defence because it was excessive force


    murder question was pretty easy, i was umming and ahhing between express and implied malice but i chose implied in the end because pushing someone off a rail doesnt neccesairly mean intention to kill does it? agh i'm so confuseddd

    then i forgot to write about foresight of consequences to i had to go back and do it in the last 5 minutes haha

    as for evaluation, i screwed up.
    I hear what your saying, but if your on a high floor like they were .. and you deliberately push someone off the edge .. i would say personally that you want them dead. There is like a 90% it would kill em to be honest ...
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

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.