Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That exam was perfect! Did causation, theft and non-fatal offences. So confident!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    My reasoning for not mentioning consent was it went beyond what he consented for as a rugby player, I mean who would consent to possible tackles resulting in broken ribs ( I think lol ).. and I put S18 for the last one as CPS charging standards state a broken jaw constituents GBH and the guy intended to cause GBH ( I think ).. any thoughts??
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xleahchloe)
    Omg that exam was actually perfect, predictions were spot on!!!! Not quite sure how my section C insanity and automatism one went though. Anyone remember what they put? :confused:
    Yup. The girl was not allowed to use the defence because she knew nature and quality of act and intended to permanently deprive. B not accurate, C also and D accurate as there was no discussion of internal factors. I fear the grade boundaries will be higher now.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ne12)
    I did a) guilty b) guilty c) consent as it was sport and d) not guilty and put s20 for some reason :/


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yh I put s20 aswell
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    WHY S.20there was intention?


    THAT EXAM WAS PERFECT WOO
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A sheesh)
    WHY S.20there was intention?


    THAT EXAM WAS PERFECT WOO
    S.18 specific intent to cause serious harm and s.20 intention to cause harm
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You can have intent for s20 aswell.. And I read in a revision book that someone who is looking a getting a s18 may getting a section 20 instead as the courts do this a lot .. Probs messed that last statement up ah well


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    At getting *


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by qr95)
    Im revising this

    Essay: Causation duress/intoxication attempts
    Problem question: all property all non fatals all murder/manslaughter
    Dillema board: insanity n automatism

    Learn defenses
    Decent predictions
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by N1037)
    For people that did insanity and automatism did you get accurate, accurate, inaccurate and accurate? Because I know of people that got both and I'm worried!
    Hm not sure what the order was in the questions were but think I put

    Statement A: accurate
    Statement B: inaccurate (wasn't sure if by taking medication this made it automatism :confused: )
    Statement C: inaccurate (no defence?)
    Statement D: accurate
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I put s20 as it wasn't really so serious.. It was unlikely he'd need to be charged more than 5 years imprisonment so couldn't see why not to put s20 . He had in intent to cause harm too


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by N1037)
    For people that did insanity and automatism did you get accurate, accurate, inaccurate and accurate? Because I know of people that got both and I'm worried!
    This is what I got. Don't understand how people could have got different conclusions? Hoping I get 15/20 in this section this is what I'm most worried about letting me down


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SAhmed95)
    To those who did OAPA in section C:

    Please please tell me you all concluded all 4 dilemmas as accurate??
    Thank god someone else did!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by N1037)
    For people that did insanity and automatism did you get accurate, accurate, inaccurate and accurate? Because I know of people that got both and I'm worried!
    (Original post by xleahchloe)
    Hm not sure what the order was in the questions were but think I put

    Statement A: accurate
    Statement B: inaccurate (wasn't sure if by taking medication this made it automatism :confused: )
    Statement C: inaccurate (no defence?)
    Statement D: accurate
    Actually think yours is right, think B is accurate cause taking his medication didn't cause his epileptic state so yeah accurate, accurate, inaccurate and accurate
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xleahchloe)
    Actually think yours is right, think B is accurate cause taking his medication didn't cause his epileptic state so yeah accurate, accurate, inaccurate and accurate
    Epilepsy is a disease of the mind defined by kemp. this case similar and following Sullivan, manifested itself in violence and was prone to recur so was insanity. That's what I thought anyway


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone besides me do duress and necessity?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by curtisblackham)
    Epilepsy is a disease of the mind defined by kemp. this case similar and following Sullivan, manifested itself in violence and was prone to recur so was insanity. That's what I thought anyway


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yeah I think you're right! I did think automatism but stupidly questioned it. I didn't really think into them much as rushed to finish them all
    Online

    10
    ReputationRep:
    What if I missed out the problems for necessity? Does that really matter? What kind of impact would that do to me? :/


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SAhmed95)
    x
    (Original post by qr95)
    x
    (Original post by ne12)
    x
    Here is what I concluded for the non-fatal offences statements.

    Statement A - Guilty of assault, but also arguably no assault as it didn't specifically say that V was in fact put in fear by the threat (may have found it amusing, etc.) If there's no fear, there's no assault.
    Statement B - Guilty of battery, simple.
    Statement C - Guilty of s20, we've always been taught to not go beyond the scope of the question and take them at face value - if it doesn't mention consent, don't bring it up, as the examiners only want you to answer the statement about the offence, not what extra knowledge you have about the potential defence.
    Statement D - Guilty of s18, but also arguably s20 could be substituted if it couldn't be proven D intended the GBH, at least reckless in causing some harm.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The exam was great but its still bugging me that I might have messed it all up. On the writting paper I put both section A answer and section B answer under the header 'Please write section A answer here'. After finishing my section B question I noticed this mistake. So I clearly marked what section each question was by placing my own headers, as well as writing a note to the examinor explain the where the answers where.

    Will they still mark both questions? It will bug me all summer until results day!
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

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.