StudentShare solutions
Triangle menu

LL1014C CRIMINAL LAW I - Case Study Example

Not dowloaded yet

Extract of sample
LL1014C CRIMINAL LAW I

Murder is the specific intent crime and manslaughter is the basic intent crime. If he does not convicted under murder then he will be charged under constructive manslaughter. A person will be liable for murder if he unlawfully killing a reasonable person who is in being under the Queen's Peace with intention to kill [Moloney1, Cunningham 2, Vickers 3] or intention to cause grievous bodily harm [DPP v Smith 4], [Saunders 5]. Murder is unlawful homicide committed with 'malice aforethought' with the penalty of mandatory life imprisonment. 'Malice aforethought' describes the mens rea for a conviction of murder. In this question, Alan's intention was to kill Clive and Betty. May be he will charged under murder.
However, if Alan does not convicted under murder then he will be charged under constructive manslaughter. The substance of this offence is that if he kills Clive in the course of doing an unlawful act or constructive manslaughter provided such act is not justified. Thus the 'unlawful act' must satisfy the criteria. Unlawful act must be more than merely negligent act (Andrew v DPP6). In Andrew, D had been driving dangerously s when he killed the deceased.
Dennis, an old friend from the pub, staggers over to Alan and gives him a hard slap on the back. Alan stumbles whilst pulling the trigger and shoots a paraffin lamp on the bar. It ignites and the pub catches fire.
The prosecution must prove that the death was caus...
Alan may claim that Dennis's act was breaking the chain of causation. He can argue that his act was not legal cause of Clive or Betttty's death. However, the landlord of the pub, Ed, has piled beer crates in front of the fire exits so the only escape is through a narrow door. Clive dies in the fire and Betty collapses in the attempted escape. The accused conduct must be a sine qua non of the prohibited consequence. In R v White7 put cyanide in his mother's drink with intent to kill her later his mother was found dead with the glass containing the poisoned drink beside her three parts full. Medical evidence established that she had died of heart failure and not from poisoning. D was acquitted of murder as he had not caused her death and thus there was no actus reus. He was however, convicted of attempted murder. But here Alan's act is legal cause of Clive's death and Dennis's act did not break the chain of causation.
Section 1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 provides that a person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence. Section 1 (3) creates the offence of statutory arson-an offence committed by destroying or damaging property by fire. For the offence to be complete some property must be destroyed or damaged by fire. The damage may of course be quite insignificant (it would be enough, for example, that wood charged) In Cf Parkker8, the court held that no visible flame is necessary.

In the Goodfellow9, D was convicted of ...Show more

Summary

This problem question deals with a number of offences including criminal damages, non-fatal offences against person and homicide offences. It also deals with several possible defences including possibly insanity and diminished responsibility, voluntary intoxication and self-defence…
Author : nolanzelma
LL1014C CRIMINAL LAW I essay example
Read Text Preview
Save Your Time for More Important Things
Let us write or edit the case study on your topic
"LL1014C CRIMINAL LAW I"
with a personal 20% discount.
Grab the best paper

Related Essays

Criminal Law
She packs her bags and goes. Not knowing what to do, Alan picks up a hunting rifle and goes in search of Clive. He looks through the pub window and sees both Betty and Clive together. Whilst taking aim at Clive with the rifle, Dennis, an old friend from the pub, staggers over Alan and gives him a hard slap on the back.
7 pages (1750 words) Case Study
Criminal Law: case study
Under the spell of rage and anger, he punched peter who collapsed, was struck with the corner of a cabinet and had ultimately died, before the medical aids arrived. There are two ways to look at whole scenario, from legal perspective. In this scenario there are two offenders.
9 pages (2250 words) Case Study
Criminal Law
Accordingly, Mr. Smith faces the risk of being sentenced to 188 months pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SEC 924(e). John Smith has pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in the federal district court. Sentencing is scheduled for January 2, 2009 and sentencing memorandums must be submitted.
5 pages (1250 words) Case Study
Criminal Law: assault charge
Therefore, he has been charged with two crimes, and in my opinion he has been charged correctly because he committed a robbery and assaulted the shopkeeper; he did not assault with the intent to rob but the other way around. In regards to the matter of whether or not it was correct that Harry was charged with part complicity in assault and robbery, because he was involved and anyone who is communicating or aiding in some way the criminal is considered to be aiding and abetting and thus can be charged.
4 pages (1000 words) Case Study
Criminal Law: problem analysis
Gabrielle and her personal trainer, Carl may be liable for conspiracy. At common law the offence of conspiracy was committed where two of more persons agreed 'to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means' [Mulcahy 1]. The offence of statutory conspiracy is defined in s 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1981.
8 pages (2000 words) Case Study
Problem essay - law - criminal law
In order to answer this question it is necessary to discuss Kirby J's view with reference to the scope of liability under principles of common purpose and the group or collective dimension of criminal activity have to the formulation of principles of liability.
8 pages (2000 words) Case Study
Criminal law problem question
The most common definition of the actus reus in murder is provided by Edward Coke, who states - "When a man of sound memory and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's Peace, .
6 pages (1500 words) Case Study
Criminal Law: analysis
The mens rea for murder is generally regarded as either the intention to kill (R. v. Mathews & Alleyne) or the intent to cause grievous bodily harm (R. v. Woolin, R. v. Moloney, R. v. Hancock & Shaknland). For intent there must have been a clear certainty that either death or grievous bodily harm would occur.
6 pages (1500 words) Case Study
Criminal Law - Theft
This is referred to as CONTEMPORANEITY RULE. Substantially, the act of committing a criminal offence is referred to as the ACTUS REUS while the state of mind of the defendant at the time of committing the criminal offence is referred to as the MENS REA. The actus reus does not just mean the act.
6 pages (1500 words) Case Study
Criminal Law
For the last 6 months, Peeta and Shami have had a number of violent arguments. Due to the recession, Peeta has been informed by Shiraab Plc. that he may be made redundant. Consequently, Peeta has been under a great deal of stress and has turned to heavy drinking. He now suffers from chronic alcoholism.
7 pages (1750 words) Case Study
Get a custom paper written
by a pro under your requirements!
Win a special DISCOUNT!
Put in your e-mail and click the button with your lucky finger
Your email
YOUR PRIZE:
Apply my DISCOUNT
Comments (0)
Rate this paper:
Thank you! Your comment has been sent and will be posted after moderation