T3ss5Grey
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
Ty
Last edited by T3ss5Grey; 1 month ago
0
reply
Catherine1973
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
What do you think? You need to give your ideas first here
0
reply
legalhelp
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
To be honest, the analysis here is all over the place, so you are missing easy points and getting some bits wrong. You need to tackle this person by person, and potential offence by offence, in a much more methodical way. There are also areas of analysis that you have missed entirely, such as joint enterprise liability.

I don’t mean to sound too harsh, but until you set out your reasoning in a clearer fashion, it is difficult to give you more constructive feedback on your answer content without basically doing it for you. Perhaps you could try re-writing it in the way I’ve suggested and we can give more specific comments after that?
0
reply
legalhelp
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
Much clearer. A couple of headline points:

(1) For murder, you first need to consider whether you think A has the MR for murder, I.e. an intention to kill or cause GBH. If not, then the intoxication point as far as murder is concerned is not relevant. Do you think intentionally stabbing someone twice in the thigh demonstrates an intent to kill or cause GBH? Why/why not? Work out whether you think the intent is there first before you go on to consider the potential impact of intoxication.

(2) For murder and MS, you need to think about the victim’s haemophilia, and the application of the thin skull rule.

(3) For MS, you need to consider whether you can make out constructive manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, or both. What do you think? The impact of intoxication on the analysis will depend on which you are considering.

(4) Whether you need to mention s. 20 at all is dependent on whether you think A intended to cause GBH or not. If he did, then you have your MR for murder and you don’t really need to mention s. 20 at all. If you’re not sure about the intent to cause GBH, then how about using s. 20 as your unlawful act for constructive manslaughter purposes? I would weave any s. 20 analysis into your manslaughter section rather than considering it as a stand-alone offence. In reality, there is no way something like this would only be charged as a s. 20.

(5) Attempted rape is tricky to prove. What would you use as your next most serious sexual offence if you couldn’t prove attempted rape?

(6) Good job on the JE liability. Bruce’s comments about Albert in interview are helpful too. Make sure that you are applying post-Jogee JE principles.
0
reply
emily frost
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 weeks ago
#5
Can you use GBH s20 as the unlawful act in unlawful act manslaughter?
0
reply
legalhelp
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 weeks ago
#6
(Original post by emily frost)
Can you use GBH s20 as the unlawful act in unlawful act manslaughter?
Yes - see bullet point (4) in my post above. You would still have to show the unlawful act caused the death, and that it was Church dangerous. But nothing to stop you using a s. 20 as your unlawful act in principle.
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

Should the school day be extended to help students catch up?

Yes (78)
29.32%
No (188)
70.68%

Watched Threads

View All