Law 03 AQA 25th Jan 2012

This is great thanks

It may be hard to evaluate something that's just recently been updated and improved. I can't think of any strong issues to do with voluntary manslaughter now that the CJA is in force. Unless, the question requires us to evaluate the changes its made.

I think it'll be either murder/ vol man or the defences.
Really hoping non fatal will come up though cus i think its the easiest!

Writing a practise murder evaluation now. Hating it.

If there's a question and you can see that it's not involuntary manslaughter (unlawful act manslaughter or gross negligence manslaughter)* because the defendant has the mens rea for murder (malice aforethought, express (intention to kill) or implied (intention to cause serious harm))* you first identify, define, explain and apply murder to the scenario. Then identify whether either defence of loss of control or of diminished responsibility is present. If one of them is you identify, define, explain and apply it to the scenario, explaining that this would mean that the defendant was convicted of voluntary manslaughter instead of murder.

*Sorry for the little notes, I'm not implying you don't know anything! I'm just trying to be clear and I don't know if I've been taught in the same way as you!

Hope this helps!

I think that there might be a high chance of this happening because it has just been updated. I don't think that they would require you to mention what updates have been made or anything just the evaluation material from the textbooks. My teacher said that she thinks that Voluntary Manslaughter might come up because it has just been changed.. I'm not sure though.

Couldn't find these online, so hopefully this should help anyone doing the exam. Law 02 and Law 03 from June 2011. Sorry I don't have the examiner's reports.



One thing I'd like to ask the community is the best way to approach a s47 offence in terms of identifying actual bodily harm. I used to think that one should use Miller 1954 ("harm that is more than transient or trifling...affects the health and wellbeing of the victim"), but in one examiner's report, they call this a 'questionable definition', preferring Chan-Fook 1994, which I would only use if the abh is related to the mind.

To say "cuts and bruises is likely s47, as Chan-Fook lists harm to the skin and flesh as ABH" is like saying "pricking another with a needle is s20, as JCC v Eisenhower says wounding requires both layers of skin to be broken". My point is the Chan-Fook definition is a lot wider than the Miller one and even though it is more modern, it doesn't seem useful. If harm to the skin constitutes ABH, who's to say a pinch is not s47? What is harm according to Chan-Fook?

Can anyone clarify?

In regards to evaluation/reform, I'm nervous too. Our class has sort of skipped over it, despite it comprising a guaranteed third of the exam. Do law examiners award out-of-box thinking or are they looking for prepared answers copied from the textbook?

Thanks! If a scenario said: Dicuss the libaility of A for the murder of B, it doesn't necessarily mean talk about murder right? It could be involuntary manslaughter?

Also, loss of self control - is that if someone shouted at me and I lost my temper?

AHHHH i've been looking for the June 2011 paper, thanks! How did u get hold of them? Could do with the June 2011 PP's for another exam!

Really don't know what evaulation will come up! Non-fatals has come up (twice?) and the others once each? (I think) Anyone have any guesses as to what they predict MIGHT come up?!

I haven't started revising for this exam! Panic!!!

you've got about 5 days, it can be done!