Hi I have been given the below question to argue on but I do not understand how I am supposed to argue in the role I have been given??
Is the defence of necessity available to the offence of murder outside the particular circumstances that arose in A (Children), and, if so, do the three requirements for the defence as set out in A (Children) leave room for the jury to take into account the defendant's reasonable belief, or are they purely objective?
I have never done this before, I have read how to moot guides and text books but I am completely oblivious.
Could someone please give me some advice?
What makes you memorable?