AQA unit 3 exam 12th June 2018 unofficial markscheme.

Watch
Bekel
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
So how did everyone find it?

Scenario 1:

1. Assault (Ellie to Beth)
S20 OAPA 1861 (Beth to Ellie)
S18 OAPA 1862 (Beth to Ellie)
Defence of self defence

2. Go through murder then not as didn’t intend.
Vol manslaughter LofC and DR
Guilty of LofC using anger trigger
DR - depression possible medical condition

3. Reforms - MR issues on intention, ambiguous wording, LofC qualifying triggers hard to understand
0
reply
mohammed786islam
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
Omg I answered scenario one but did s47 ABH (battery occassioning abh) instead of s20 as i thought the scar to the face was not really serious. do u think i would get marks?
0
reply
Bekel
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#3
(Original post by mohammed786islam)
Omg I answered scenario one but did s47 ABH (battery occassioning abh) instead of s20 as i thought the scar to the face was not really serious. do u think i would get marks?
I think it’s positive marking! I’ve seen people have put ABH as well so if you’ve done it detailed and applied correctly you should get some marks!

Scars left damage to the face which can be under s18 as GBH or really serious harm
0
reply
Nimra786
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by mohammed786islam)
Omg I answered scenario one but did s47 ABH (battery occassioning abh) instead of s20 as i thought the scar to the face was not really serious. do u think i would get marks?
You would still get marks as you must have explained it well
0
reply
Nimra786
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by Bekel)
So how did everyone find it?

Scenario 1:

1. Assault (Ellie to Beth)
S20 OAPA 1861 (Beth to Ellie)
S18 OAPA 1862 (Beth to Ellie)
Defence of self defence

2. Go through murder then not as didn’t intend.
Vol manslaughter LofC and DR
Guilty of LofC using anger trigger
DR - depression possible medical condition

3. Reforms - MR issues on intention, ambiguous wording, LofC qualifying triggers hard to understand
For the mens rea for murder i wrote oblique intention, would i still get marks?
0
reply
EllieH12345
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
I said that Beth’s injuries to Ellie was also ABH. I didn’t really consider scarring to be permanent disfigurement. The case of DPP v K was based on scarring and the defendant was charged with ABH so I based it off of that. Hope I haven’t messed it all up
0
reply
Bekel
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by Nimra786)
For the mens rea for murder i wrote oblique intention, would i still get marks?
Yeah so murder you’d go through intention and state direct and indirect intent but wouldn’t say indirect as he didn’t virtually foresee or appreciate that throwing a brick would cause the death.
0
reply
Higuys24
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Was it public self defence or mistaken? I wrote public as there was an imminent threat to herself
0
reply
Higuys24
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
Also I think you need to discuss whether it was s47 and s20. Didn’t do s18 as it wasn’t really bad
0
reply
Nimra786
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
(Original post by Bekel)
So how did everyone find it?

Scenario 1:

1. Assault (Ellie to Beth)
S20 OAPA 1861 (Beth to Ellie)
S18 OAPA 1862 (Beth to Ellie)
Defence of self defence

2. Go through murder then not as didn’t intend.
Vol manslaughter LofC and DR
Guilty of LofC using anger trigger
DR - depression possible medical condition

3. Reforms - MR issues on intention, ambiguous wording, LofC qualifying triggers hard to understand
Did you state that she would get the defence of self defence or not ?
0
reply
Bekel
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#11
(Original post by Nimra786)
Did you state that she would get the defence of self defence or not ?
Yes I said she would
0
reply
ameliabio
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
Did anyone use the principle of transfer of malice in scenario 1, question 1?
I saw on twitter someone put that there could be transfer of malice for Ellie to Beth assault, as she intended to scare Alison (with her insults and coffee) yet scared Beth instead?

I didn't write it but now I'm worried...
0
reply
mohammed786islam
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by Higuys24)
Also I think you need to discuss whether it was s47 and s20. Didn’t do s18 as it wasn’t really bad
I only managed to dicuss s47 didnt think about s20 at the time
0
reply
mohammed786islam
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
I applied everything for loss of control well i think i did but i ran out of time and didnt have time to write how he may have acted out of revenege and only wrote one sentence about sexual infidelity? would i still get marks?
Scenario 1:

1. Assault (Ellie to Beth)
S20 OAPA 1861 (Beth to Ellie)
S18 OAPA 1862 (Beth to Ellie)
Defence of self defence

2. Go through murder then not as didn’t intend.
Vol manslaughter LofC and DR
Guilty of LofC using anger trigger
DR - depression possible medical condition

3. Reforms - MR issues on intention, ambiguous wording, LofC qualifying triggers hard to understand[/QUOTE]
1
reply
Emmaudofia14
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
Anyone got anything for scenario 2???
0
reply
mohammed786islam
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
For the evaluation - u could talk about the serious harm rule (mr - how anyone who commits gbh could be in the same position as a serial killer), mention the criticism about the ar (reasonable creature) + the reform about it becoming more clear), state the reclassification of the defence e.g. first degree, second degree (reckless killing),
for voluntary manslaughter - u could mention how dm requires a reverse burden of proof - possibler reform is to reverse it back to crown + loss of control criticisms regarding sexual infidelity e.g. Clinton case causes confusion
0
reply
Emmaudofia14
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
Because i got:
04 - s18/20 Franco - Gianna (defence of intoxication and consent)
- s20 Franco to Harriet

05 - Unlawful act manslaughter Gross negligence manslaughter

However, I didn't mention Gross Negligence manslaughter,but i applied the crap out of unlawful act manslaughter how many marks would i have lost?
0
reply
Oakzar
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
Scenario 2

1:
- Battery; ABH
- Wounding s.20 / s.18 (discuss both sections)
- Transferred malice
- Consent (lawful exception: rough horseplay)
- Intoxication

2:
- Unlawful act manslaughter
- Gross negligence manslaughter
- Potentially mention thin skull rule
- New intervening act of other thief
0
reply
mohammed786islam
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
I only managed to write enough points about murder but only mentioned 2 criticisms and 2 reforms for involuntary - am i able to get a sound answer?
0
reply
eagrimbleby
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
i also made this mistake of doing uam and not gnm as well which is also a seperate potential content. i looked at last years paper and you were rewarded a strong clear for doing one only which gave you a maximum of 13 marks so i would say you would achieve somehting similar to that.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have the space and resources you need to succeed in home learning?

Yes I have everything I need (286)
55.97%
I don't have everything I need (225)
44.03%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed