The Student Room Group

AQA - A2 Law - June 2014

Created this page for discussion and to help with AQA Law - Unit 3 (Offences Against the Person on 12th June '14) and Law - Unit 4 (Offences Against the Property on 17th June '14).

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
My method for approaching the problem questions in Unit 3 & Unit 4

- Read the scenario carefully. Figure out which information is important and which information is surplus information which can throw you off. Also pretty much common sense, but remember who the question is asking you to discuss criminal liability for.
- Create a brief plan and put in chronological order the offences depending on seriousness. It is advisable to leave defences towards the end after you mention the offences however you can mention it briefly whilst doing the offences.
- Identify the offence and the relevant statute.
- Define the offence according to the legal provisions set by the act.
- Explain the Actus Reus elements and then apply to the scenario.
- Explain the Mens Rea elements and then apply to the scenario.
- Or Explain the criteria and apply it to the scenario.
Example of Answer
1. (Defendant) is potentially liable for (Offence) contrary to (Statute).
2. For (Offence) the actus reus is… and the mens rea is…
To conclude, it is likely that D will be convicted of (Offence) because he suffices the AR and the MR of (offence)

Original post by Fortune36
Created this page for discussion and to help with AQA Law - Unit 3 (Offences Against the Person on 12th June '14) and Law - Unit 4 (Offences Against the Property on 17th June '14).


heyyy
Reply 3
Helen suffered from a personality disorder, with symptoms including loss of temper and
aggression when under stress. For a few months, her partner, Ian, had behaved in an
unpleasant and violent way towards her and had provided little money for household
expenses. Helen believed that Ian was in a relationship with another woman. That
belief was strengthened when she listened to a voicemail from a woman on his phone,
saying how wonderful he had been last weekend. When she confronted him about it,
he laughed scornfully and told her that the woman was a friend who was thanking him
for lending her a large amount of money. When Ian went to bed, he threatened to beat
Helen up the next morning if she did not leave the house and go to stay with her mother.
About an hour later, when Ian was asleep, Helen lit a powerful firework, which she had
bought a few days earlier, and threw it into the bedroom. When the firework exploded,
it caused a fire which developed very quickly. Ian was unable to escape and died in the
blaze.
Reply 4
Murder - AR: Unlawful killing of a person. MR: Oblique Intent/Moloney/Nedrick (Foresight of Consequences.
Loss of Control - Need Not Be Sudden/Aluwalia, Qualifying Trigger - Things said or done which consitute a circumstances of grave character... justifiable sense of being seriously wronged. (Sexual infidelity is excluded)
Diminished Responsibility - RMC/AMF - Personality Disorder,SI - Exercise self control
personality disorder- dim res- recognised medical condition
ian abusive- ahluwalia/ thornton
helen believed ian was cheating- sexual infidelity
loss of control does not have to be imminent- helen planned attack- firework- hour later
helen- battered woman syndrome
murder- express malice- intended to kill him as he was abusive/ threw firework in bedroom- dangerous- cunningham
murder- implied malice- intended to cause gbh- intended to make him suffer for all he had put her through- not to kill him
Reply 6
(A) Explanation of the elements of the offence of murder, concentrating in particular on
the mens rea of murder: intention to kill or cause gbh; direct and oblique intention.

(B) Explanation of the defence of loss of control: issue of loss of self-control and
considered desire for revenge; the fear trigger; the anger trigger (the ‘circumstances’,
including possible sexual infidelity); the ultimate objective test. (Max sound for anger
trigger only, in context; max clear for fear trigger only in context.)

(C) Explanation of the defence of diminished responsibility: abnormality of mental
functioning (substantial impairment of ability to exercise self-control?); recognised
medical condition (personality disorder); provides explanation. Discussion of insanity
only merits max weak clear.
Reply 7
This thread looks perfect to help! How is everyone coping with revision etc?
Revision is fine im just wondering what the reform question could be has anyone got any ideas of what it could be
Reply 9
Original post by crazyfi621
Revision is fine im just wondering what the reform question could be has anyone got any ideas of what it could be

Non fatal came up last time so thats unlikely
Reply 10
most likely murder but i wouldnt be surprised if aqa threw in defences so i suggest preparing for both
I was just wondering how much we should write for concluding what offence D is most likely to be convicted of?
Reply 12
Original post by KasabianChief
I was just wondering how much we should write for concluding what offence D is most likely to be convicted of?


brief paragraph like two/three sentences. the examiners dont care what conclusion you comeup with just aslong as you have sufficient evidence with relevant authority.
Reply 13
Ta Da.. Here's all the legislation possibly required for the unit 3 exam.
FATAL AND NON FATAL OFFENCES

HOMICIDE
YEAR AND A DAY RULE - LAW REFORM (YEAR AND A DAY RULE) ACT 1996
MURDER MR: FORESIGHT - S.8 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1988
LOSS OF CONTROL S.54 CORONERS AND JUSTICE ACT 2009
DEFINITION OF LOSS OF CONTROL S.54 (1) CORONERS AND JUSTICE ACT 2009
LOSS OF CONTROL: NEED NOT BE SUDDEN - S.54 (2) CORONERS AND JUSTICE ACT 2009
INTRODUCTION OF DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY & CORRECT CITATION OF DR - S.2 HOMICIDE ACT 1957
REPLACEMENT OF S.2 (1) OF THE HOMICIDE ACT 1957 - S.52 OF THE CORONERS AND JUSTICE ACT 2009
NON-FATAL OFFENCES
COMMON ASSAULT - S.39 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1989
ASSAULT OCCASIONING ACTUAL BODILY HARM - S.47 OF THE OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON ACT 1861
GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM - S.20 OF THE OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON ACT 1861
GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM WITH INTENT - S.18 OF THE OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON ACT 1861

GENERAL DEFENCES
PUBLIC DEFENCE S.3 Criminal Law Act 1967
Do you think murder evaluation is likely guys?
i definitely think murder evaluation is the most likely! quick question though, on the unit 3 paper is there always a murder question on one of the scenario's? from looking back at past papers it seems so but i just want to be sure?!
Reply 16
lol imagine they throw in nonfatal evaluation just for the fun of it..
I personally think that although murder seems the most likely, it really could be anything, and they could repeat non-fatal, so be prepared for everything!!

Also, there is generally a murder question every year, however the odd year they've meshed it with either unlawful act/gross negligent manslaughter. :smile: good luck!
Hey guys!

Just had the law 3 exam today,

I did the first scenario.... I was aiming for an A* in this exam but I don't think I'm gonna get it now because of the timing issue! :frown:

For question 1: I did assault, abh, gbh (briefly) pretty well, and I did a bit of self defence but couldn't finish it! I think it would've been a good answer if I finished self defence, and would've got the extra few AO3 marks :frown:

question 2: I did murder pretty well and part of gross neg - but I knew I had to include loss of control but I ran out of time!

Question 3: I think I did the defences essay pretty well, but I missed one of the quotes from the law commission :/


How many marks do you reckon I could lose???
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 19
a* was 69 out of 85. let say you average 18 in application questions and 20ish in q3 that's 57 so maybe a b or high C. plus 5 bonus marks for qwc so perhaps a B

Quick Reply

Latest