Back
to top
AQA A Level Law 7162 Paper 1 (4th June 2019) Unofficial Mark Scheme
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Hey guys, I'm quite new to actually posting on TSR so apologies if I seem weird lol. Anyway, did the first paper this morning and came and saw NO unofficial mark scheme or discussion of it at all.
Anyway here are some of the things that came up today and if anyone wants to, feel free to add more (sorry, TSR put this up on the wrong forum first)
Bilal
What came up:
Q1-5: Multiple choices but cannot remember them as I did them just before the exam ended. I think they were on statutory interpretation, recklessness, lay magistrates, mens rea (correct me if I'm wrong)
Q6: The purposive approach in statutory interpretation (left this one blank)
Q7: Transferred malice and why D would be found to have the mens rea of an offence (don't know why it wasn't why the D cannot be found guilty of an offence as in the previous specimens and papers I've done)
Q8: Capacity defence of insanity (could not use as D did not take insulin for several days so seems to be automatism instead as it was external, not internal)
Q9: Fault and strict liability (was so amazed this came up!)
Q10: Gail - Murder, loss of control as a partial defence; Ian - S20/S18 OAPA 1861 (said it was S18 because of the busy road and this formed an intention to cause serious harm)
Q11: Daryl - Robbery and necessity defence of duress (defence is not available as it was self-induced since he joined a gang that was known to steal from local stores); Fran - Theft (wasn't too sure about this one as it was the issue of whether not keeping an expensive mobile phone model that she never asked for is theft); ELS - Legal aid (was quite alright if you know about Citizens Advice Bureaux and free one hour consultations from solicitors and also pro-bono).
Anyway here are some of the things that came up today and if anyone wants to, feel free to add more (sorry, TSR put this up on the wrong forum first)
Bilal
What came up:
Q1-5: Multiple choices but cannot remember them as I did them just before the exam ended. I think they were on statutory interpretation, recklessness, lay magistrates, mens rea (correct me if I'm wrong)
Q6: The purposive approach in statutory interpretation (left this one blank)
Q7: Transferred malice and why D would be found to have the mens rea of an offence (don't know why it wasn't why the D cannot be found guilty of an offence as in the previous specimens and papers I've done)
Q8: Capacity defence of insanity (could not use as D did not take insulin for several days so seems to be automatism instead as it was external, not internal)
Q9: Fault and strict liability (was so amazed this came up!)
Q10: Gail - Murder, loss of control as a partial defence; Ian - S20/S18 OAPA 1861 (said it was S18 because of the busy road and this formed an intention to cause serious harm)
Q11: Daryl - Robbery and necessity defence of duress (defence is not available as it was self-induced since he joined a gang that was known to steal from local stores); Fran - Theft (wasn't too sure about this one as it was the issue of whether not keeping an expensive mobile phone model that she never asked for is theft); ELS - Legal aid (was quite alright if you know about Citizens Advice Bureaux and free one hour consultations from solicitors and also pro-bono).
1
reply
Report
#2
If you wish to speak about the exam to others maybe try posting it to here: https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho....php?t=5897932
0
reply
Report
#3
Have a look at the case Hennessy. From what I gathered, not taking your insulin is an internal cause (taking the insulin would’ve been external and therefore automatism), so insanity could succeed.
1
reply
Report
#4
(Original post by BHus371)
Hey guys, I'm quite new to actually posting on TSR so apologies if I seem weird lol. Anyway, did the first paper this morning and came and saw NO unofficial mark scheme or discussion of it at all.
Anyway here are some of the things that came up today and if anyone wants to, feel free to add more (sorry, TSR put this up on the wrong forum first)
Bilal
What came up:
Q1-5: Multiple choices but cannot remember them as I did them just before the exam ended. I think they were on statutory interpretation, recklessness, lay magistrates, mens rea (correct me if I'm wrong)
Q6: The purposive approach in statutory interpretation (left this one blank)
Q7: Transferred malice and why D would be found to have the mens rea of an offence (don't know why it wasn't why the D cannot be found guilty of an offence as in the previous specimens and papers I've done)
Q8: Capacity defence of insanity (could not use as D did not take insulin for several days so seems to be automatism instead as it was external, not internal)
Q9: Fault and strict liability (was so amazed this came up!)
Q10: Gail - Murder, loss of control as a partial defence; Ian - S20/S18 OAPA 1861 (said it was S18 because of the busy road and this formed an intention to cause serious harm)
Q11: Daryl - Robbery and necessity defence of duress (defence is not available as it was self-induced since he joined a gang that was known to steal from local stores); Fran - Theft (wasn't too sure about this one as it was the issue of whether not keeping an expensive mobile phone model that she never asked for is theft); ELS - Legal aid (was quite alright if you know about Citizens Advice Bureaux and free one hour consultations from solicitors and also pro-bono).
Hey guys, I'm quite new to actually posting on TSR so apologies if I seem weird lol. Anyway, did the first paper this morning and came and saw NO unofficial mark scheme or discussion of it at all.
Anyway here are some of the things that came up today and if anyone wants to, feel free to add more (sorry, TSR put this up on the wrong forum first)
Bilal
What came up:
Q1-5: Multiple choices but cannot remember them as I did them just before the exam ended. I think they were on statutory interpretation, recklessness, lay magistrates, mens rea (correct me if I'm wrong)
Q6: The purposive approach in statutory interpretation (left this one blank)
Q7: Transferred malice and why D would be found to have the mens rea of an offence (don't know why it wasn't why the D cannot be found guilty of an offence as in the previous specimens and papers I've done)
Q8: Capacity defence of insanity (could not use as D did not take insulin for several days so seems to be automatism instead as it was external, not internal)
Q9: Fault and strict liability (was so amazed this came up!)
Q10: Gail - Murder, loss of control as a partial defence; Ian - S20/S18 OAPA 1861 (said it was S18 because of the busy road and this formed an intention to cause serious harm)
Q11: Daryl - Robbery and necessity defence of duress (defence is not available as it was self-induced since he joined a gang that was known to steal from local stores); Fran - Theft (wasn't too sure about this one as it was the issue of whether not keeping an expensive mobile phone model that she never asked for is theft); ELS - Legal aid (was quite alright if you know about Citizens Advice Bureaux and free one hour consultations from solicitors and also pro-bono).
1
reply
Report
#5
(Original post by BHus371)
Hey guys, I'm quite new to actually posting on TSR so apologies if I seem weird lol. Anyway, did the first paper this morning and came and saw NO unofficial mark scheme or discussion of it at all.
Anyway here are some of the things that came up today and if anyone wants to, feel free to add more (sorry, TSR put this up on the wrong forum first)
Bilal
What came up:
Q1-5: Multiple choices but cannot remember them as I did them just before the exam ended. I think they were on statutory interpretation, recklessness, lay magistrates, mens rea (correct me if I'm wrong)
Q6: The purposive approach in statutory interpretation (left this one blank)
Q7: Transferred malice and why D would be found to have the mens rea of an offence (don't know why it wasn't why the D cannot be found guilty of an offence as in the previous specimens and papers I've done)
Q8: Capacity defence of insanity (could not use as D did not take insulin for several days so seems to be automatism instead as it was external, not internal)
Q9: Fault and strict liability (was so amazed this came up!)
Q10: Gail - Murder, loss of control as a partial defence; Ian - S20/S18 OAPA 1861 (said it was S18 because of the busy road and this formed an intention to cause serious harm)
Q11: Daryl - Robbery and necessity defence of duress (defence is not available as it was self-induced since he joined a gang that was known to steal from local stores); Fran - Theft (wasn't too sure about this one as it was the issue of whether not keeping an expensive mobile phone model that she never asked for is theft); ELS - Legal aid (was quite alright if you know about Citizens Advice Bureaux and free one hour consultations from solicitors and also pro-bono).
Hey guys, I'm quite new to actually posting on TSR so apologies if I seem weird lol. Anyway, did the first paper this morning and came and saw NO unofficial mark scheme or discussion of it at all.
Anyway here are some of the things that came up today and if anyone wants to, feel free to add more (sorry, TSR put this up on the wrong forum first)
Bilal
What came up:
Q1-5: Multiple choices but cannot remember them as I did them just before the exam ended. I think they were on statutory interpretation, recklessness, lay magistrates, mens rea (correct me if I'm wrong)
Q6: The purposive approach in statutory interpretation (left this one blank)
Q7: Transferred malice and why D would be found to have the mens rea of an offence (don't know why it wasn't why the D cannot be found guilty of an offence as in the previous specimens and papers I've done)
Q8: Capacity defence of insanity (could not use as D did not take insulin for several days so seems to be automatism instead as it was external, not internal)
Q9: Fault and strict liability (was so amazed this came up!)
Q10: Gail - Murder, loss of control as a partial defence; Ian - S20/S18 OAPA 1861 (said it was S18 because of the busy road and this formed an intention to cause serious harm)
Q11: Daryl - Robbery and necessity defence of duress (defence is not available as it was self-induced since he joined a gang that was known to steal from local stores); Fran - Theft (wasn't too sure about this one as it was the issue of whether not keeping an expensive mobile phone model that she never asked for is theft); ELS - Legal aid (was quite alright if you know about Citizens Advice Bureaux and free one hour consultations from solicitors and also pro-bono).
0
reply
Report
#6
(Original post by hieu.nguyen)
hello, what you have given, which are really helpful. can you also help with AQA Law Paper 2 (tort) 2019 please? what did come up?
hello, what you have given, which are really helpful. can you also help with AQA Law Paper 2 (tort) 2019 please? what did come up?
0
reply
Report
#7
(Original post by seshhead112)
did you get the unofficial mark scheme?
did you get the unofficial mark scheme?
Did you find anything?
0
reply
Report
#8
0
reply
Report
#9
(Original post by hieu.nguyen)
Hi have you done the mock paper 1 2020. I did one 30 marks scenario in that paper.
Hi have you done the mock paper 1 2020. I did one 30 marks scenario in that paper.
0
reply
Report
#10
0
reply
Report
#11
Hi. This is actually wrong. Q10 its not section 18, its section 20 GBH. Just because he pushed her into a busy road doesn’t mean intent. It’s section 20 as Ian unlawfully wounded or inflicted GBH on another person. Mens rea of s.20 means the defendant must have the intention or to be reckless as to the causing of some harm. Ian pushed her into the round because of self defence- self defence is lawful GBH under the Criminal law act 1967 section 3 where lord Griffiths stated that genuine belief of fear is enough to satisfy reasonable action for self defence and Ian genuinely believed he was in danger from Gail- hence pushing her into a road. Therefore its section 20, not 18.
0
reply
Report
#12
(Original post by Madeleine8292)
Hi. This is actually wrong. Q10 its not section 18, its section 20 GBH. Just because he pushed her into a busy road doesn’t mean intent. It’s section 20 as Ian unlawfully wounded or inflicted GBH on another person. Mens rea of s.20 means the defendant must have the intention or to be reckless as to the causing of some harm. Ian pushed her into the round because of self defence- self defence is lawful GBH under the Criminal law act 1967 section 3 where lord Griffiths stated that genuine belief of fear is enough to satisfy reasonable action for self defence and Ian genuinely believed he was in danger from Gail- hence pushing her into a road. Therefore its section 20, not 18.
Hi. This is actually wrong. Q10 its not section 18, its section 20 GBH. Just because he pushed her into a busy road doesn’t mean intent. It’s section 20 as Ian unlawfully wounded or inflicted GBH on another person. Mens rea of s.20 means the defendant must have the intention or to be reckless as to the causing of some harm. Ian pushed her into the round because of self defence- self defence is lawful GBH under the Criminal law act 1967 section 3 where lord Griffiths stated that genuine belief of fear is enough to satisfy reasonable action for self defence and Ian genuinely believed he was in danger from Gail- hence pushing her into a road. Therefore its section 20, not 18.
0
reply
Report
#13
(Original post by laurenhallewell)
Are you 100% certain?
Are you 100% certain?
0
reply
Report
#14
(Original post by hieu.nguyen)
Im not really sure, but it was about unlawful act manslaughter, robbery( need to explain theft), maybe intoxication as a defence.
Im not really sure, but it was about unlawful act manslaughter, robbery( need to explain theft), maybe intoxication as a defence.
0
reply
Report
#15
(Original post by hieu.nguyen)
This is 30 markers in paper 1 2019 which is available in the set of materials on AQA website. My class didnt do this one. We did 30 markers in paper 1 A-level law 2020.
This is 30 markers in paper 1 2019 which is available in the set of materials on AQA website. My class didnt do this one. We did 30 markers in paper 1 A-level law 2020.
0
reply
Report
#16
(Original post by laurenhallewell)
What offence is on the 2020 paper?
What offence is on the 2020 paper?
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by Madeleine8292)
Hi. This is actually wrong. Q10 its not section 18, its section 20 GBH. Just because he pushed her into a busy road doesn’t mean intent. It’s section 20 as Ian unlawfully wounded or inflicted GBH on another person. Mens rea of s.20 means the defendant must have the intention or to be reckless as to the causing of some harm. Ian pushed her into the round because of self defence- self defence is lawful GBH under the Criminal law act 1967 section 3 where lord Griffiths stated that genuine belief of fear is enough to satisfy reasonable action for self defence and Ian genuinely believed he was in danger from Gail- hence pushing her into a road. Therefore its section 20, not 18.
Hi. This is actually wrong. Q10 its not section 18, its section 20 GBH. Just because he pushed her into a busy road doesn’t mean intent. It’s section 20 as Ian unlawfully wounded or inflicted GBH on another person. Mens rea of s.20 means the defendant must have the intention or to be reckless as to the causing of some harm. Ian pushed her into the round because of self defence- self defence is lawful GBH under the Criminal law act 1967 section 3 where lord Griffiths stated that genuine belief of fear is enough to satisfy reasonable action for self defence and Ian genuinely believed he was in danger from Gail- hence pushing her into a road. Therefore its section 20, not 18.
0
reply
Report
#18
(Original post by laurenhallewell)
Would it definitely be S20 tho and not S18?
Would it definitely be S20 tho and not S18?
(Original post by hieu.nguyen)
Robbery (+ theft) and unlawful act manslaughter. May be intoxication as a defence
Robbery (+ theft) and unlawful act manslaughter. May be intoxication as a defence
0
reply
Report
#19
Q10- Gail is liable for murder but can plead guilty to voluntary manslaughter as it was through a loss of control. It was originally a murder charge as she intended to cause Serious injury which is suffice for the men’s rea of murder
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
