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

2017 Law unit 2 aqa unofficial markscheme

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Thank you sooooo much
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by new1234)
    You could still get 10 marks if you did everything else right!!
    Yeah he better give me those 10 marks.






    Or else, I will find him.





    Honest to God.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sararodrigues)
    Yeah he better give me those 10 marks.

    Or else, I will find him.

    Honest to God.
    Wasn't the question 8 marks? Also not mentioning transfer of malice will limit you as it's a key aspect of the answer, D never had the MR for the female.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ydnmz20)
    Thank you sooooo much
    You are very welcome!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sararodrigues)
    Yeah he better give me those 10 marks.






    Or else, I will find him.





    Honest to God.
    Haha. Usually for these questions they say something like credit transferred malice implying credit can be gained elsewhere so hopefully!!!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHarrisMedia)
    Wasn't the question 8 marks? Also not mentioning transfer of malice will limit you as it's a key aspect of the answer, D never had the MR for the female.
    Ahh was it 8 marks?? Thought it was 10. My mistake could be 8. And still get credit elsewhere. They dont need it for sound surely if you apply the offence correctly??
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by new1234)
    Ahh was it 8 marks?? Thought it was 10. My mistake could be 8. And still get credit elsewhere. They dont need it for sound surely if you apply the offence correctly??
    Yeah don't believe this was a 10 mark, only 8. You'd definitely get credit elsewhere but you can't say D has committed the offence if the Mens Rea isn't there unless the offence is of strict liability or through transfer of malice. I doubt this would limit you massively, possibly to 5/6 marks though.
    Offline

    1
    (Original post by CHarrisMedia)
    Yeah don't believe this was a 10 mark, only 8. You'd definitely get credit elsewhere but you can't say D has committed the offence if the Mens Rea isn't there unless the offence is of strict liability or through transfer of malice. I doubt this would limit you massively, possibly to 5/6 marks though.
    What if you said the battery was indirect but didnt talk about transferred malice?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHarrisMedia)
    Wasn't the question 8 marks? Also not mentioning transfer of malice will limit you as it's a key aspect of the answer, D never had the MR for the female.
    I have to say the truth... your answer has made m
    e sad.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gumgum999)
    What if you said the battery was indirect but didnt talk about transferred malice?
    Honestly not sure, I doubt it as the correct way of referring is transfer of malice, the battery occurred between John and Gordon and then a battery between Gordon and Pia but obviously the second battery was a result of the first, also you'd be going into a lot of depth around battery when the offence in question is ABH.


    (Original post by sararodrigues)
    I have to say the truth... your answer has made m
    e sad.
    Sorry just being realistic, I really wouldn't worry too much about it. It's not the end of the world losing out on 2/3 marks, these can easily be gained elsewhere.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gumgum999)
    What if you said the battery was indirect but didnt talk about transferred malice?
    I wrote an indirect battery too but I'm not sure if that's right


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    Did everyone finish on time? I didnt
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rdlewiss)
    I wrote an indirect battery too but I'm not sure if that's right
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I mentioned indirect battery (DPP v K) when explaining battery but for ABH there was no indirect battery that occurred.
    Offline

    1
    (Original post by CHarrisMedia)
    I mentioned indirect battery (DPP v K) when explaining battery but for ABH there was no indirect battery that occurred.
    But didnt the ABH result from the indirect battery because John did not actually directly apply force on Pia
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHarrisMedia)
    I mentioned indirect battery (DPP v K) when explaining battery but for ABH there was no indirect battery that occurred.
    well there goes another grade of mine!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rdlewiss)
    Did you guys say small tracks for the damage to greenhouse & car but fast track for personal injury at that they're both at the county court?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The case would go to the fast track as that was the highest, they would not have c separate cases for one event but I doubt you'd lose more than a mark, if any
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sararodrigues)
    Okay, I guess I didn't do so bad but I did not mention transferred malice on the ABH question. Damn it! I knew it.
    What did you say instead? It might be viable if explained and applied
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I got confused with Q4 and put rules of causation only?

    But i talked about assault and battery occasioning ABH on Q3?

    Please help, will i lose all the marks still?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rdlewiss)
    well there goes another grade of mine!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Can I just say I'm not an examiner but this is from my understanding, I may be wrong and really wouldn't worry about something you've missed out/been incorrect on.
    (Original post by gumgum999)
    But didnt the ABH result from the indirect battery because John did not actually directly apply force on Pia
    Yes that is what Transfer of malice is though, when intention is transferred to someone not intended/direct through the person that was intended. You may potentially get some credit for indirect battery but I don't see why because that is what transfer of malice is in this example.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Deavk006)
    I got confused with Q4 and put rules of causation only?

    But i talked about assault and battery occasioning ABH on Q3?

    Please help, will i lose all the marks still?
    What was Q4?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Which party will you be voting for in the General Election 2017?

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.