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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lucy Helps)
    Question - if someone enters a building as a trespasser WITH INTENT to steal and inflict GBH and then goes on to inflict GBH and steal is that 9(1)(a) or (b) - if the offence is completed is it always B?
    This is where people are getting confused:My textbook says that 9(1)(b) is when you commit the act, so I would of said that because they entered and stole it is 9(1)(b)but other people are saying 9(1)(b) is when you have to have intent after your inside I don't know who's right though
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lucy Helps)
    Question - if someone enters a building as a trespasser WITH INTENT to steal and inflict GBH and then goes on to inflict GBH and steal is that 9(1)(a) or (b) - if the offence is completed is it always B?
    9(1)(a)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For section B do you think you can write some facts even if its not in the situation given? because I learnt all these facts and that will be so annoying to not be able to say them
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So I've just done a past paper and according to the book i've pretty much hit all AO1 and included a fair bit of AO2. Yet when looking at the mark scheme it seems to have totally different points to me!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That exam was so good!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What was the answers for question 7 lol?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I did question 3 in section A the intoxication one but I feel the second part of that wasn't really reform and I think the way it was worded was really confusing, I just said that it is available of u aren't at fault because of the fall back principle but again it's not available as a defence because u will still get charged even if u had no intention

    then I did scenario 3 in vol manslaughter but I didn't mention unlawful act manslaughter because I didn't think it was relieved but I did mention gross negligent and a bit of reckless less

    I also found the case law didn't really match the scenario but I put them in anyway so I think I did 5 cases

    I did robbery for section c but I found that it was very repetitive and I think only one statement he committed robbery

    but I don't know I hunk I messed up!

    any help would be appreciated! x


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What a paper until section C... could have answered 4 questions on Section A and B but had no clue about Section C so thats 20 marks dropped. 38 marks each I'm gonna need for a B.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GFEFC1)
    What a paper until section C... could have answered 4 questions on Section A and B but had no clue about Section C so thats 20 marks dropped. 38 marks each I'm gonna need for a B.
    same section c was horrible did u do robbery or insanity


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angel_xo)
    same section c was horrible did u do robbery or insanity


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I went for robbery but for no reason what so ever. I'm pretty devastated as even 10 marks from that would have got me a solid B i think. What did you do?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GFEFC1)
    I went for robbery but for no reason what so ever. I'm pretty devastated as even 10 marks from that would have got me a solid B i think. What did you do?
    yeah same I did robbery

    I felt like I was repeating my self too much and I think he could have been found guilty of robbery for just one of the statements

    I just said that he wasn't guilty of robbery coz u need the actus reus and mens tea for theft plus the force but he misty just created fear of force but with out acc stealing anything but I'm not sure if that's right



    I really messed up that paper




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    did anyone else do these:
    Section A: attempts
    Section B: non fatal offences
    Section C: robbery/burglary


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rhiannaf)
    did anyone else do these:
    Section A: attempts
    Section B: non fatal offences
    Section C: robbery/burglary


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    just section c I hated it I think it was too repetitive and I only said one of the statements was robbery wbu how did I find it?!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I panicked the first 20 min as I went straight for intoxication because I saw actus reus on the second one and I skipped attempts.
    But then I was struggling with intoxication so I read the second questions once more and had nearly tears of joy when I saw theft.
    First time ever I asked for extra paper in an exam, I wrote 9 pages alone for first question.

    I forgot if we had to put any case law in section C, I just outlined the actus reus, mens rea and whether the statement was accurate, I nearly run out of time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think i had inaccurate, accurate, accurate, accurate? Really can't remember if that's right. Basically:

    Statement A: 9(1)(a) burglary when tried the door - he didnt enter so he can't have been guilty. (Cant remember if statement said he will or wont be guilty)

    Statement B: robbery when (cant remember)

    Statement C: 9(1)(b) burglary when entered the petrol station - he entered and attempted to steal cigarettes so would have been guilty

    Statement D: robbery when took the bike - he thieved the bike and used force immediately before. He would have been guilty.

    That's what i put, from what i can remember. Hoping others put these too!



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rhiannaf)
    I think i had inaccurate, accurate, accurate, accurate? Really can't remember if that's right. Basically:

    Statement A: 9(1)(a) burglary when tried the door - he didnt enter so he can't have been guilty. (Cant remember if statement said he will or wont be guilty)

    Statement B: robbery when (cant remember)

    Statement C: 9(1)(b) burglary when entered the petrol station - he entered and attempted to steal cigarettes so would have been guilty

    Statement D: robbery when took the bike - he thieved the bike and used force immediately before. He would have been guilty.

    That's what i put, from what i can remember. Hoping others put these too!



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    yeah I kinda did that too but i didn't say that when he took the bike it was robbery because there was no force in relation to the theft of the bike so it was theft not sure if that's right


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone do contract law or know a thread with contract law? I can't find one anywhere :/
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angel_xo)
    yeah I kinda did that too but i didn't say that when he took the bike it was robbery because there was no force in relation to the theft of the bike so it was theft not sure if that's right


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I spoke to my teacher and he said that in such a situation the threat of force did not occur immediately before appropriation and that threat was made to facilitate taking of cigarettes, it was irrelevant to the theft of a bike. You are correct.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by justmyself)
    I panicked the first 20 min as I went straight for intoxication because I saw actus reus on the second one and I skipped attempts.
    But then I was struggling with intoxication so I read the second questions once more and had nearly tears of joy when I saw theft.
    First time ever I asked for extra paper in an exam, I wrote 9 pages alone for first question.

    I forgot if we had to put any case law in section C, I just outlined the actus reus, mens rea and whether the statement was accurate, I nearly run out of time.
    Yeahh me too, i used a whole bookley for section A! How many pages is that haha? Just hoping i've smashed A and B because i've got no marks from C
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by qwertypoiop)
    I spoke to my teacher and he said that in such a situation the threat of force did not occur immediately before appropriation and that threat was made to facilitate taking of cigarettes, it was irrelevant to the theft of a bike. You are correct.
    I couldn't even gave my teacher after that but I appreciate u letting me know I isn't explain it in depth but hopefully I'll get some marks


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
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.