distance learning module planner - asp2 home page law 1.pdf · the above in relation to this...

Distance Learning Module Planner

Criminal Law 1Course Code: MP–LD2002Module Leader: Margaret Walsh

© University of Wolverhampton 2007

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or byany means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retriev-al system of any nature without either the written permission of the copyright holder, application forwhich should be made to the University of Wolverhampton, or a licence permitting restricted copy-ing in the United Kingdom issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Any person who infringesthe above in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims fordamages.

ContentsHow to Use Your Module Planner 5

Topics Covered by Module 7

Skills to be Developed and Examined 8

Examinations 9

A Brief Guide to Study Skills 10

Introduction to Study Units 13

Reading List 14

Study Unit 1: Actus Reus and Mens Rea 16

Study Unit 2: Homicide (I): Murder – Causation and Mens Rea 19Study Unit 3: Homicide (II): Murder-specific Defences: Provocationand Diminished Responsibility (Voluntary Manslaughter) 22

Study Unit 4: Homicide (III): Involuntary Manslaughter – GrossNegligence and Constructive Manslaughter; Proposals for Reform 25

Study Unit 5: General Defences: Where the Mental Element is Affected 28

Study Unit 6: Review of Homicide: Problem-solving Exercises 31

Study Unit 7: Non-fatal Offences Against the Person 32

Study Unit 8: General Defences: Compulsion 36

Study Unit 9: Inchoate Offences 39

Study Unit 10: Review: Problem-solving Exercises 42

Learning Project 44

Practice Question and Suggested Answer 49

Revision 55

Taking the Examination 59

Module Questionnaire 61

How to Use Your Module PlannerThe Module Planner is vital to your studies. It divides the work in each area into Units, and showsyou the minimum number of hours you should spend on each Unit, at the top right hand corner ofthe first page of each Study Unit, in order to understand the law involved. You should plan on de-voting a minimum of 150 hours to each module you study.

The section headed ‘Essential Reading’ contained in the Reading List and each Study Unit refersyou to the materials with which you are provided: the Textbook, 150 Leading Cases and StatuteBook. The materials listed in the Essential Reading are sufficient to enable you to complete thecourse very effectively.

The section headed ‘General Reading’ lists other books which, if you wish, you can read to giveyou other approaches to the law. These books are not provided but you should be able to pur-chase them from Hammicks Legal Bookshop, whose address, telephone number and website de-tails are provided in the General Reading section of the Reading List. They are not essential foryou to be successful on the course, but they may help to give you a different viewpoint of the lawinvolved in this module.

The Module Planner guides you through the course. Work through it logically, and in order, andmake sure you understand one Unit before you move on to the next. At the end of each Unit youwill find a set of Self-Study Questions. Test yourself on these and make sure you understand thembefore you move onto the next Unit.

At the end of the Study Units you will find the Learning Project. A compulsory question will be setin the examination in Section A of your paper on all or parts of the material covered by the Learn-ing Project, and this will count for 50 per cent of your overall grade, so it is essential that you en-sure you study and understand all aspects covered by it. The Study Units which relate to theLearning Project have been indicated to guide you through this material while you study.

The Module Planner is your guide to the topic of English law that it covers. Have it with you as youstudy and you will make the most of this opportunity to obtain the best law degree of which youare capable.

With this Module Planner you should have the following materials:

Criminal Law TextbookMolan (4th edition 2006) Old Bailey Press

Criminal Law 150 Leading CasesMolan, M. Cases & Materials on Criminal Law, 4th edition (2007), CavendishCracknell (6th edition 2007) Old Bailey Press

Criminal Law Revision WorkBook(3rd edition 2002) Old Bailey Press

If you do not receive this set of materials, please contact:Distance Learning DepartmentHolborn CollegeWoolwich RoadCharltonLondonSE7 8LNTel: +44 (0) 208 317 6000Fax: +44 (0) 208 317 6003E-mail: [email protected]

Topics Covered by Module

This module covers the following topics within English law.

Actus Reus and Mens Rea

Homicide (I): Murder – Causation and Mens Rea

Homicide (II): Murder-specific Defences: Provocation and Diminished

Responsibility (Voluntary Manslaughter)

Homicide (III): Involuntary Manslaughter – Gross Negligence and

Constructive Manslaughter; Proposals for Reform

General Defences: Where the Mental Element is Affected

Review of Homicide: Problem-solving Exercises

Non-fatal Offences Against the Person

General Defences: Compulsion

Inchoate Offences

Review: Problem-solving Exercises

Skills to be Developed and ExaminedTo be successful in the end of module examination you need to show that you understand andcan apply the area(s) of law you have been studying. You must be able to demonstrate this to theexaminers by writing answers which communicate the points you wish to make accurately and ingood English. This is a key part of demonstrating that you have understood the points of law, thecases and the Acts of Parliament that you have studied.

Before you start to write your answer, identify the issues that are relevant to the question. Thesemust be clearly stated in your short introductory paragraph(s). When referring to case law andstatute law, you then need to explain the relevant legal principles in the context of the issues youidentified in your introductory paragraph(s). Finally, you need to write a concluding paragraphwhich brings your points together. Do not write everything you know about an area, or writeanswers that take the form of a series of notes. Your answer should be structured in the way de-scribed above and be written in good English.

For further guidance on how you will be graded please consult your Award Guide which containsan explanation of the criteria used to grade your work.

It is important that you practice answering questions and in particular take the opportunity to sub-mit a sample question for marking and feedback. This question is contained in the Practice Ques-tion section of the Module Planner.

ExaminationsThis module is assessed by one, two hour, unseen written examination. Examinations take placein September, January, and May of each year. The examination is in two parts: Part A is a com-pulsory question and counts for 50 per cent of the total grade, Part B has four questions of whichyou will be required to answer two only. Each of the questions in Part B is worth 25 per cent of thetotal grade.

The compulsory question in Part A is based on those topics which make up the Learning Project.You will find details of the Learning Project and the topic area covered by it at the end of the StudyUnits in this Module Planner. You should read this section carefully to identify those areas of themodule covered by the Learning Project.

You will, therefore, know in advance of the examination that there will be a substantial question onthe topics covered by the Learning Project. When you write the examination you should make surethat you devote 50 per cent of the time to the question in Part A. Your answer to this questionshould normally be about twice as long as your answer to the two questions in Part B.

The purpose of the Learning Project is to allow you to study a significant part of the syllabus indepth in the sure knowledge that you will be examined on it. In this way, hard-working studentswho have studied their materials thoroughly will be able to write an in-depth answer and have fullcredit for the work they have done reflected in the grade awarded.

There is no assessed coursework for this module. The total grade for the module is based uponthe unseen written examination. Although you should make sure that you cover the whole sylla-bus, it is particularly important that you study those syllabus topics which are covered by theLearning Project thoroughly so that you can write a complete answer to the compulsory questionin Part A and take advantage of the fact that this question is worth 50 per cent of the grade.

The examination is a two-hour examination with an additional 15 minutes reading time. It is an un-seen examination. You will, however, be able to take into the examination an unmarked copy ofyour 150 Leading Cases, Statute Book and Law Update (this means that you should not write onthese materials; you are only allowed to underline or highlight part of the text). As stated above,you will also know what topics will be covered by the compulsory question in Part A of theexamination, provided you have studied the details of the Learning Project at page 44 of this Plan-ner.

A Brief Guide to Study SkillsAs a distance learning student you will undoubtedly have other demands on your time. It is, there-fore, important that you use your time effectively. The following tips are intended to help you doso.

Time Management

Be realistic.Work out what time you have available for study; take out time for sleeping, eating, recrea-tion, etc.Try to plan ahead – do not leave everything to the last minute.Prioritise – do not do the easiest task first, but the one that really needs to be done first.Set objectives which are reasonable, and make sure that they are somewhere you seethem.Break large tasks into manageable sub-tasks and set target dates against each sub-task.Keep a wall planner chart.Try doing the most difficult things when you feel at your best.Remember the unexpected always happens, so be flexible – don’t get angry when planshave to change.

Effective Reading

Reading

Read with purpose (what questions have to be answered?).Read selectively – scan and skim – only read in detail what you need to.Mentally recite what you have just read.Make notes at appropriate points – bullet points, do not rewrite the whole book.

Review

Did I answer the questions I wanted to?Do I understand and remember what I read?

Studying

Where?

Choose somewhere that is conducive to study. You need: a large table or desk; a suitablechair; a bookcase; adequate, suitable lighting; adequate ventilation; reasonable tempera-ture – too cold,you can’t concentrate – too warm, you will go to sleep.Banish distractions – magazines, radio, telephone, TV.Decide where you study best, and try to keep to it.

When?

When you are alert.Not when you are too tired.When it is the best time of day for you – some people work better at night, others early inthe morning.

How?

Try studying for 50 minutes, break for 10 minutes, etc.Have all you need available – pens, pencils, dictionary, PC, etc.Avoid too much physical relaxation or you will go to sleep!Actively study – make notes, etc. It is difficult to just read for toolong; it makes you sleepy and you lose concentration.Remember to have breaks and do have time for relaxation.Set yourself targets, and give yourself rewards!

Practice Questions

At the end of each unit you will find Sample Questions, and at the end of the Planner is a PracticeQuestion and Suggested Answer. strongly advised to submit at least one answer to either a Sam-ple Question or the Practice Question for marking. Unless you do so you will not gain any insightinto your strengths and weaknesses.

Introduction to Study UnitsThe Study Units deal with the individual topics covered by the module. The module is brokendown into Study Units to enable you to look at each area of law in digestible parts. You must workthrough each Study Unit in order, ensuring that you understand the material covered by each Unitbefore progressing on to the next one.

Each Study Unit is broken down into four major sections.

Reading List

This indicates what reading you must do (Essential Reading) in order to cover all of the materialset in the Unit. All material listed in the Essential Reading is provided as part of your study materi-als. You can, if you wish, further your knowledge and understanding by completing the GeneralReading in each Unit. These materials are not essential for you to complete the course, but youmay find them useful in your study. Such materials are not supplied, and you are responsible forobtaining copies of the titles listed in the General Reading. Details are given in the Reading List ofsuppliers.

Case Law and Statutes

This section directs you to those cases and statutes that you will need to read and understand inorder to complete the Unit. All materials listed here can be found in your Textbook or 150 LeadingCases.

Self-Study Questions

These are questions designed to set the parameters of the Study Unit and to test your applicationof the basic principles.

Sample Questions

These may be essay or problem questions, often taken from past examination papers. You shouldattempt your own answers to all of these questions.

Reading List

These are the titles that you will use throughout the course. They are referred to in the readingsection of each Study Unit, to guide you in your learning.

Essential Reading

All materials listed here must be read in order for you to understand the module. These books aresupplied as part of your study materials.

Criminal Law TextbookMolan (4th edition 2006) Old Bailey Press

Criminal Law 150 Leading CasesMolan (4th edition 2007) Old Bailey Press

Criminal Law Statute BookCracknell (6th edition 2007) Old Bailey Press

General Reading

These materials are not supplied, and are not essential to pass the module. You may, however,wish to refer to them to deepen your understanding of the topics covered by the course. You areresponsible for obtaining your own copies of these titles. If you choose to do so, you should beable to purchase them by contacting Hammicks Legal Bookshops at 192 Fleet Street, LondonEC4A 2NJ; tel: +44 (0)20-7405- 5711 or you can order online at www.hammickslegal.co.uk.

Ormerod, D, “Smith & Hogan Criminal Law” (2005), 11th edition, Oxford

Ormerod, D, “Smith & Hogan Criminal Law Cases & Materials” (2006), 9th edition, Oxford.

Ashworth, A, Principles of Criminal Law, 5th edition (2006), Oxford

Criminal Law Jefferson (8th edition 2007) Addison Wesley LongmanCases and Materials on Criminal Law Elliott and Wood (9th edition 2006) Sweet & Maxwell

In addition, in each Study Unit you will find a list of cases which should be consulted. Summariesof these can be found in the 150 Leading Cases; cases marked with an * are referred to in theTextbook. If you have access to the Internet you may wish to take advantage of the legal materialsavailable via this source. See your Award Guide for details.

For those students who have never studied the law, certain terminology used may be difficult tounderstand at first. As you progress through the course, you will learn a range of new words andphrases that are frequently used in the study of law. If you encounter any difficulties with the termi-nology used, however, you will find it useful to refer to a legal dictionary, which will explain themeaning of legal words and phrases in plain English. Mozley and Whitley’s Law Dictionary (12thedition 2001) by Butterworths is very helpful, and can be purchased through Hammicks LegalBookshops.

Study Unit 1 Suggested minimum study hours: 10

Topic

Actus Reus and Mens Rea

Introduction

Crimes, by their nature, have ‘elements’: factors that must be proved before guilt can be estab-lished. In this Unit, we examine the two main elements of a crime; the actus reus (or the guilty act)and the mens rea (the guilty mind). It is important at this stage that you understand, and can iden-tify, the actus reus and mens rea of a particular crime, and that you appreciate how the two mustcoincide before guilt can be established.

Objectives

a To examine the technical requirements of a crime.b To examine types of actus reus.c To differentiate between the various degrees of mens rea.

Essential Reading

These titles have been supplied as part of your study materials.Criminal Law Textbook – Chapters on Actus Reus and Mens ReaCriminal Law 150 Leading Cases – (See listed cases)

General Reading

These titles have not been supplied and are not essential reading, butyou may wish to refer to them to further your understanding.Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law, Smith and Hogan – RelevantChapter(s)Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Smith andHogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Principles of Criminal Law, Ashworth – Relevant Chapter(s)Criminal Law, Jefferson – Relevant Chapter(s)Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, Elliott and Wood – RelevantChapter(s)

Case law and statutes

ACTUS REUS

* Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121R v Cogan and Leak [1975] 3 WLR 316; [1976] QB 217* R v Deller (1952) 36 Cr App R 184* R v Instan [1893] 1 QBD 450* R v Larsonneur (1933) 24 Cr App R 74R v Miller [1983] 2 WLR 539; [1983] 1 All ER 978Matthews [2003] 2 Cr App R 461DPP v Santana-Bermudez [2004] Crim LR 471 (DC)* R v Pittwood (1902) 19 TLR 37R v Stone and Dobinson [1977] QB 354Ruffell [2003] EWCA Crim 122Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462

MENS REA

Attorney–General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1997] 3 All ER 936B v DPP [2000] 1 All ER 833Beckford v R [1988] AC 130; [1987] 3 WLR 611; [1987] 3 All ER 425Chandler v DPP [1964] AC 763 (HL)* Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset v Shimmen (1987) 84 Cr App R 7Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Caldwell [1982] AC 341;[1981] 1 All ER 961DPP v Morgan [1976] AC 182Hyam v DPP [1975] AC 55; [1974] 2 All ER 41R v Adomako [1995] 1 AC 171; [1994] 3 WLR 288 (HL)R v Church [1966] 1 QB 59R v Coles [1994] Crim LR 820* R v Crossman [1986] Crim LR 406R v Cunningham [1957] 2 All ER 412; [1957] 2 QB 396R v Seymour [1983] 2 AC 493; [1983] 2 All ER 1058R v Hancock and Shankland [1986] AC 455 (HL)R v Latimer (1886) 17 QBD 359R v Le Brun [1991] 3 WLR 653; [1991] 4 All ER 673R v Moloney [1985] 2 WLR 648; [1985] 1 All ER 1025 (HL)R v Nedrick [1986] 1 WLR 1025; [1986] 3 All ER 1R v Pembliton (1874) LR 2 CCR 119R v Woollin [1998] 3 WLR 382; [1998] 4 All ER 103 (HL)Matthews [2003] 2 Cr App R 461Thabo Meli v R [1954] 1 WLR 228* W (A Minor) v Dolbey [1983] Crim LR 681

Criminal Attempts Act 1981: s1(1)Criminal Justice Act 1967: s8Criminal Law Act 1977: s1(1) (as amended)Offences Against the Person Act 1861: s18(1)Theft Act 1968: ss1(1), 3, 9(1)(a) and 22(1)Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other cases can be found in your 150Leading Cases.


1 Distinguish between:

a intention;b recklessness; andc negligence.

2 What is meant by saying ‘mens rea and actus reus must coincide’?3 Distinguish between direct and indirect intention. In what circumstances may a jury be directedto infer intention from a defendant’s conduct?

Sample Questions

1 With reference to decided cases illustrate the concept of mens rea and clearly distinguish be-tween ‘intention’, ‘recklessness’ and ‘gross negligence’.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, January 2001,Question 2.)

2 Discuss the proposition that, since the House of Lords has now had three attempts at definingintent, Parliament should adopt the proposals set out in the draft Criminal Code.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 2001, Question 2.)


Topic

Homicide (I): Murder – Actus Reus and Mens Rea

This Unit covers material contained in the Learning Project.

Introduction

English criminal law provides a range of offences that recognise thesanctity of life by prohibiting the unlawful killing of a human being. Inthis Unit, we shall examine the gravest of these crimes, murder, andconsider the required actus reus and mens rea for this offence.

Objectives

a To examine the actus reus of murder.b To examine the doctrine of causation in relation to murder.c To consider the mens rea of murder.

Essential Reading

These titles have been supplied as part of your study materials.

Criminal Law Textbook – Relevant chaptersCriminal Law 150 Leading Cases – (See listed cases)

General Reading

These titles have not been supplied and are not essential reading, but you may wish to refer tothem to further your understanding.

Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law, Smith and Hogan – RelevantChapter(s)

Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Smith andHogan – Relevant Chapter(s)

Principles of Criminal Law, Ashworth – Relevant Chapter(s)Criminal Law, Jefferson – Relevant Chapter(s)

Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, Elliott and Wood – RelevantChapter(s)


Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1997] 3 All ER 936 (HL)Hyam v DPP [1974] 2 All ER 41; [1975] AC 55 (HL)* R v Armstrong [1989] Crim LR 149R v Blaue [1975] 3 All ER 446; [1975] 1 WLR 1411R v Cheshire [1991] 3 All ER 670; [1991] 1 WLR 844; (1991) 93 Cr App R 251Marchant [2004] 1 WLR 442 (CA)R v Church [1966] 1 QB 59; [1965] 2 All ER 72* R v Coroner for Inner West London, ex parte De Luca [1988] 3 WLR 286R v Cunningham [1982] AC 566R v Dear [1996] Crim LR 595 (CA)R v Hancock and Shankland [1986] 1 All ER 641; [1986] AC 455 (HL)R v Jordan (1956) 40 Cr App R 152R v Le Brun [1991] 4 All ER 673; [1991] 3 WLR 653R v Malcherek; R v Steel [1981] 1 WLR 690Gowans [2003] EWCA Crim 3935R v Moloney [1985] 2 WLR 648; [1985] 1 All ER 1025; [1985] AC 905R v Nedrick [1986] Crim LR 742; [1986] 1 WLR 1025; [1986] 3 All ER 1R v Pagett (1983) 76 Cr App R 279* R v Vickers [1957] 2 QB 664R v Williams; R v Davies [1992] Crim LR 198; [1992] 1 WLR 380;[1992] 2 All ER 183 (CA)R v Woollin [1998] 4 All ER 103 (HL)Thabo Meli v R [1954] 1 WLR 228

Criminal Justice Act 1967: s8Homicide Act 1957: s1Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other cases can be found in your 150Leading Cases.


1 What is the full definition of murder?2 Explain the doctrine of causation in relation to murder.3 What is the effect of the ‘thin skull rule’ (see R v Blaue [1975] 3 All ER446)?4 Does negligent medical treatment break the ‘chain of causation’?5 What is the effect of the unforeseeable act of a third party on the‘chain of causation’?6 What direction should a trial judge give the jury on the meaning ofintention in a murder case?

Sample Question

Susan (Mary’s daughter) was a haemophiliac whose blood would not clot like ordinary persons.After a row with Mary, Henry, intending to frighten Mary, threw a brick through what he believed tobe Mary’s bedroom. Susan, who was asleep in the room, was cut by flying glass.

She was rushed to hospital for a blood transfusion. Danny, a doctor, gave her the wrong type ofblood and Susan’s body rejected the treatment. She went into a coma and died.

Discuss Henry’s liability for murder.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)


Topic

Homicide (II): Murder-specific Defences: Provocation and DiminishedResponsibility (Voluntary Manslaughter)


Introduction

In this Unit, we shall examine the various defences available to a defendant who has caused avictim’s death, and has been proved to have had the requisite mens rea for murder, but, by reasonof the defence being established, can reduce a murder charge to one of voluntary manslaughter.

Objectives

a To examine the limited defences available to reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter.b Consider the purposes and effects of the defences.c Outline the criticisms of the defences, particularly provocation and diminished responsibility, andconsider how they may be reformed.

Essential Reading



General Reading


Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law, Smith and Hogan – RelevantChapter(s)Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Smith andHogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Principles of Criminal Law, Ashworth – Relevant Chapter(s)Criminal Law, Jefferson – Relevant Chapter(s)Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, Elliott and Wood – Relevant Chapter(s)


Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1997] 3 All ER 936 (HL)DPP v Camplin [1978] 2 All ER 168; [1978] AC 705 (HL)* Luc Thiet Than v R [1996] 2 All ER 1033; [1997] AC 131 (PC)* R v Acott [1997] 1 WLR 306; [1997] 1 All ER 706 (HL)R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889* R v Ali [1989] Crim LR 736R v Byrne [1960] 2 QB 396* R v Duffy [1949] 1 All ER 932* R v Egan [1992] 4 All ER 470* R v Fenton (1975) 61 Cr App R 261R v Gittens [1984] 3 All ER 252; [1984] QB 698* R v Humphreys [1995] 4 All ER 1008 (CA)* R v Inseal [1992] Crim LR 35* R v McShane (1978) 66 Cr App R 97* R v Marks [1998] Crim LR 676R v Morhall [1995] 3 WLR 330; [1995] 3 All ER 659; [1996] 1 AC 90 (HL)* R v Pearson [1992] Crim LR 193* R v Richens [1993] Crim LR 384* R v Roberts [1986] Crim LR 122* R v Rossiter [1994] 2 All ER 752 (CA)R v Sanderson (1994) 98 Cr App R 325* R v Thornton (No 2) [1996] 2 All ER 1023 (CA)R v Smith (Morgan) [2000] 4 All ER 289Weller [2004] 1 Cr App R 1 (CA)Holley v Attorney General for Jersey [2005] 2 AC 580Mohammed [2005] EWCA Crim 1880James [2006] 1 AER 759 (CA)R v Tandy (1988) 87 Cr App R 45; [1989] 1 All ER 267Dietschmann [2003] 1 AC 1209

Homicide Act 1957: s2 (diminished responsibility)Homicide Act 1957: s3 (provocation)Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other cases can be found in your 150Leading Cases.


1 What subjective condition has to be satisfied to show provocation?2 What is the importance of the ‘cooling off’ period between the provocation and the killing?3 What objective condition needs to be satisfied?4 Explain the effect of R v Smith (Morgan) [2000] 4 All ER 289 on the objective condition for prov-ocation.5 May the jury take into account the mental state of the defendant for the purposes of provoca-tion?6 What is the effect of s2 Homicide Act 1957?7 How will a jury decide if the abnormality ‘substantially impairs’ the accused’s responsibility for hisacts?

Note: you will need to return to diminished responsibility after you have studied the general de-fences.

Sample Questions

1 Fred and Harold were arguing about the respective merits of two different types of beer. Fredpreferred ‘real ale’ and he belonged to a group which promoted ‘real ale’. Harold preferred ‘kegbeer’ and he said to Fred: ‘You lot that drink and promote “real ale” are all the same, your obses-sion with the stuff is just a cover up for your own sexual inadequacy’. Fred, distressed by Harold’sopposition to ‘real ale’, became enraged when he heard what Harold had said, picked up aglass mug and smashed Harold over the head with it.

Discuss Fred’s criminal liability if Harold dies from the injuries sustained in the attack.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

2 Harry was hit on the head by Ian in a boxing match. He appeared to suffer no ill effects from theblow but later developed a blood clot in the brain. Harry became subject to periods of depression,tiredness and outbursts of uncontrollable violence. He hit his wife over the head with a spade,though he had no recollection of the event. Harry was driving his car when he fell asleep at thewheel and ran down and killed James, who was waiting for a bus. When he arrived home he wasvery depressed and drank two large whiskies before falling asleep. When he came round he dis-covered he had strangled his sister Kate.

What crimes, if any, have been committed?(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)


Topic

Homicide (III): Involuntary Manslaughter – Gross Negligence and Constructive Manslaughter; Pro-posals for Reform

Introduction

Involuntary manslaughter, unlike murder or voluntary manslaughter, is charged when the defend-ant causes the death of a victim, but has no requisite mens rea to kill or commit grievous bodilyharm.

Objectives

a To examine the different types of involuntary manslaughter.b To compare involuntary manslaughter with murder and by so doing revise the various degreesof mens rea included within the offences, and consider once more the distinction between a sub-jective approach and an objective approach.c To consider the recommendations regarding unlawful homicide made by the Criminal Law Revi-sion Committee 14th Report and examine how those recommendations would change the presentlaw if implemented.

Essential Reading



General Reading


Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law, Smith and Hogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Smith and Hogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Principles of Criminal Law, Ashworth – Relevant Chapter(s)Criminal Law, Jefferson – Relevant Chapter(s)Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, Elliott and Wood – Relevant Chapter(s)


Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1999) [2000] 3 All ER 182 (CA)DPP v Newbury and Jones [1976] AC 500; [1976] 2 All ER 365Kong Cheuk Kwan v R [1985] Crim LR 78; (1985) 82 Cr App R 18R v Adomako [1994] 3WLR 288; [1994] 3 All ER 79; [1995] 1 AC 171 (HL)Wacker [2003] QB 1207Misra [2005] 1 WLR 1R (on the application of Rowley) v DPP [2003] EWCH 693* R v Arobieke [1988] Crim LR 314R v Bateman [1925] All ER Rep 45; (1925) 19 Cr App R 8R v Cato [1976] 1 WLR 110; (1976) 62 Cr App R 41Rogers [2003] 1 WLR 1374Kennedy (No. 2) [2005] 1 WLR 2159Dias [2002] 2 Cr App R 96Andrews [2003] Crim LR 477R v Church [1966] 1 QB 59; [1965] 2 All ER 72Dhaliwal [2006] EWCA Crim 1139 (CA)R v Dawson (1985) 81 Cr App R 150; [1985] Crim LR 383R v Franklin (1883) 15 Cox CC 163R v Goodfellow (1986) 83 Cr App R 23* R v Jennings [1990] Crim LR 588R v Lamb [1967] 2 All ER 1282; [1967] 2 QB 981* R v Lowe [1973] QB 702R v Miller [1983] 2 AC 161 (HL)Matthews [2003] 2 Cr App R 461DPP v Santana-Bermudez [2004] Crim LR 471 (DC)R v Mitchell [1983] 2 WLR 938; [1983] 2 All ER 427R v Seymour [1983] 2 AC 493; [1983] 2 All ER 1058* R v Slingsby [1995] Crim LR 570R v Stone and Dobinson [1977] QB 354R v Watson [1989] 2 All ER 865; [1989] 1 WLR 684

Homicide Act 1957Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other cases can be found in your 150Leading Cases.


1 What is the doctrine of constructive manslaughter?2 What is meant by an ‘unlawful act’ in this context?3 Is the test of dangerousness an objective or a subjective test?4 What is the effect of R v Dawson and R v Watson on the test of dangerousness?5 What is the mens rea for constructive manslaughter?6 What test did Lord Mackay set out for gross negligence manslaughter in R v Adomako?

Sample Questions

1 Distinguish between constructive manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter. Does therecklessness type still exist and, if so, what conditions must be met in order for it to apply? What isthe effect of Adomako on Seymour?(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

2 Examine the need for reform of the law relating to involuntary manslaughter, and discuss theproposals for reform suggested by the Criminal Law Revision Committee, the Criminal Code Bill,and the Law Commission.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

3 E’s nephew, F, was a drug addict. F accepted E’s invitation to live with him. F became very ill asa result of the withdrawal from heroin. E managed to obtain the drug for him and watched as Finjected himself with it. The heroin was contaminated and F went into a coma. E did not knowwhat to do; he was afraid to call an ambulance in case the police were notified. He hoped that Fwould recover, but several hours later F died.

Advise E.

(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)


Topic

General Defences: Where the Mental Element is Affected


Introduction

In this Unit, we shall examine three general defences available; insanity, automatism and intoxica-tion, and consider their application to particular circumstances.

Objectives

a To compare and contrast insanity, automatism and intoxication.b To consider diabetics, drunks, drug-users, epileptics and sleepwalkers.

Essential Reading



General Reading



Case law and statute

INSANITY

M’Naghten’s Case (1843) 10 C & F 200* R v Antoine [2000] 2 All ER 208 (HL)R v Hennessy [1989] 1 WLR 287; [1989] Crim LR 356R v Kemp [1957] 1 QB 399; [1956] 3 All ER 249R v Quick [1973] QB 910R v Sullivan [1983] 2 WLR 392; [1984] AC 156R v Windle [1952] 2 All ER 1; [1952] 2 QB 826NON-INSANE AUTOMATISMRoach [2002] EWCA Crim 2700Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1992) [1993] 3 WLR 982; [1993] 4 All ER 683 (CA)Bratty v Attorney-General for Northern Ireland [1963] AC 386Broome v Perkins [1987] RTR 321R v Bailey [1983] 2 All ER 503; [1983] 1 WLR 760R v Burgess [1991] 2 All ER 769; [1991] 2 WLR 1206R v T [1990] Crim LR 256

INTOXICATION/EFFECT OF DRUGS

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1975) [1975] 3 WLR 11Attorney-General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher [1963] AC 349Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Caldwell [1981] 1 All ER961; [1982] AC 341 (HL)DPP v Beard [1920] AC 479DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443; [1976] 2 All ER 142Jaggard v Dickinson [1981] QB 527; [1981] 2 WLR 118* R v Allen [1988] Crim LR 698* R v Fotheringham [1988] Crim LR 846R v Hardie [1985] 1 WLR 64; [1984] 3 All ER 848R v Kingston [1994] 3 WLR 519; [1994] 3 All ER 353 (HL)R v Lipman [1970] 1 QB 152R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267

Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other casescan be found in your 150 Leading Cases.


1 What is the definition of insanity in the M’Naghten Rules?2 What is a defect of reason?3 What is the connection between insanity and automatism?4 Distinguish insanity from diminished responsibility. How does a ‘disease of the mind’ differ froman ‘abnormality of the mind’?5 Distinguish between specific and basic intent crimes. What is the significance of this for the de-fence of intoxication?

Sample Questions

1 Distinguish between the defences of:a automatism;b insanity; andc diminished responsibility.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

2 State a case for the retention of insanity as a defence.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)


Topic

Review of Homicide: Problem-solving Exercises

Introduction

In this Unit, you will reinforce your learning and understanding of the topics previously covered byapplying your knowledge to a series of mock situations. The following questions are designed togive further practice in tackling issues raised by Study Units 1–5.

Sample Questions

1 Jack had lived with Martin for ten years, during which time he had been subjected to brutal treat-ment by Martin. Many times Jack had been tempted to leave Martin, but Martin said that if Jackwere to do so, Martin would never rest until he found him and killed him. Gradually, Jack’s will waseroded and his sense of self-esteem was very low.

One day, during a meal made by Jack, Martin threw the plateful of food straight at him, saying:‘This tastes like dog food!’. The plate broke and cut Jack badly about the face. Jack thereupon de-termined that the only way to escape the torment was to kill Martin.

Waiting until Martin fell asleep some hours later, Jack stabbed him repeatedly with a bread knife.Martin was not dead when the police arrived and was taken to hospital. A nurse gave a transfu-sion of the wrong type of blood and Martin died.

Discuss Jack’s liability for murder.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

2 J had visited K, his hypnotherapist, for treatment for the relief of pain. After treatment J was stillunder the influence of hypnosis, though he gave no signs of this. Whilst driving home J ran downand killed L, a child aged six years, who had run out in front of J’s car. Unaware of the accident, Jwalked away to his home nearby. There he drank three whiskies. J then went for a walk and metM, who called him a thick idiot. J lost his temper and hit M over the head with his walking stick. Mhad a thin skull and died from the blow.

Advise J as to his criminal liability.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)


Topic

Non-fatal Offences Against the Person

IntroductionIn this Unit, you will consider the various types of non-fatal offences against the person that existin English law, examining the varying degrees of actus reus and mens rea that are required foreach particular offence.

Objectives

a To examine in detail the individual offences in the area of offences against the person.b To compare and contrast the different types of actus reus and mens rea within the various of-fences.c To examine the progression in the degree of seriousness of the offences reflected in the varyingmens rea and actus reus of the offences.d To consider the effect of consent as a defence to non-fatal offences.

Essential Reading



General Reading


Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law, Smith and Hogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Smith andHogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Principles of Criminal Law, Ashworth – Relevant Chapter(s)Criminal Law, Jefferson – Relevant Chapter(s)Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, Elliott and Wood – RelevantChapter(s)Note: the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is referred to as ‘OAP’.


ASSAULT AND BATTERY

* DPP v Taylor [1992] 1 All ER 299; [1992] 2 WLR 460Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1968] 3 All ER 445; [1969]1 QB 439Dpp v Santana-Bermudez [2004] Crim LR 471* Haystead v DPP [2000] 3 All ER 890 (CA)* Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121R v Burstow; R v Ireland [1997] 3 WLR 534; [1997] 4 All ER 225 (HL)* R v Wilson [1955] 1 All ER 744* Smith v Superintendent of Woking Police Station (1983) 76 Cr App R 234* Tuberville v Savage (1669) 1 Mod Rep 3OAP ACT 1861: S47 (ASSAULT OCCASIONING ACTUAL BODILY HARM)R v Chan-Fook [1994] 1 WLR 689; [1994] 2 All ER 552Dhaliwal [2006] 2 Cr App R 348DPP v Smith [2006] 1 WLR 1571T v DPP [2003] Crim LR 622R v Miller [1954] 2 All ER 529; [1954] 2 QB 282R v Mowatt [1968] 1 QB 421; [1967] 3 All ER 47R v Roberts (1971) 56 Cr App R 95* R v Rushworth (1993) 95 Cr App R 252R v Savage; R v Parmenter [1991] 4 All ER 698; [1991] 3 WLR 914 (HL)R v Spratt (1990) 91 Cr App R 362; [1990] 1 WLR 1073; [1991] 2 All ER 210G [2004] 1 AC 1034 (HL)OAP ACT 1861: S20 (INFLICTING GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM)DPP v Smith [1961] AC 290 (HL)Bollam [2004] 2 Cr App R 50* JJC (A Minor) v Eisenhower [1983] 3 All ER 230; [1984] QB 331R v Clarence (1888) 22 QBD 23Dica [2004] QB 1257Konzani [2005] 2 Cr App R 198 (CA)R v Mandair [1994] 2 All ER 715 (HL); [1994] 2 WLR 700 (HL)R v Mowatt (above)* R v Rushworth (above)R v Savage; R v Parmenter (above)* W (A Minor) v Dolbey [1983] Crim LR 681OAP ACT 1861: S18 (CAUSING GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM WITH INTENT)DPP v Smith (above)* R v Belfon [1976] 1 WLR 741; [1976] 3 All ER 46* R v Brown and Stratton [1998] Crim LR 485OAP ACT 1861: SS23 AND 24 (POISONING)R v Cato [1976] 1 WLR 110R v Cunningham [1957] 2 All ER 412; [1957] 2 QB 396* R v Dones [1987] Crim LR 682* R v Gillard (1988) 87 Cr App R 189R v Hill [1986] Crim LR 815* R v Marcus [1981] 1 WLR 774

CONSENT

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 6 of 1980) [1981] 2 All ER 1057; [1981] QB 715* R v Adkins [2000] 2 All ER 185 (CA)R v Aitken and Others [1992] 1 WLR 1066; [1992] 4 All ER 541

R v Boyea [1992] Crim LR 574R v Brown [1993] 2 WLR 556 (HL); [1993] 2 All ER 75 (HL)Dica [2004] QB 1257Konzani [2005] 2 Cr App R 198 (CA)Barnes [2005] 1 WLR 910DPP v Smith [2006] 1 WLR 1571R v Coney (1882) 8 QBD 534R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498R v Kimber [1983] 1 WLR 1118* R v Richardson and Others (1989) The Times 20 OctoberR v Wilson [1996] 3 WLR 125 (CA)

Criminal Justice Act 1988: s39 (common assault)

Cases marked with an * can be found in your Textbook; all other cases can be found in your 150Leading Cases.

Self-Study Questions1 What is an assault?2 What is a battery?3 What mens rea is required for each?4 What is the effect of R v Mowatt?5 What is the effect of R v Savage; R v Parmenter on mens rea for nonfatal offences?

Sample Questions

1 Dave and Dan were on their way home from work when they came across Vic. They stared atVic and blocked his path. Vic was terrified and decided to escape. Vic fell and twisted his ankle.Dan was excited and, waving his arms at Vic, turned to Dave, misjudged the distance and caughthim in the face with his arm, causing him a broken nose. Dave reached into his pocket, pulled outa knife and stabbed Dan, causing him serious injury.

Discuss the criminal liability of Dave and Dan.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 2001, Question 4.)

2 Jack and Jill visited a gun shooting range. Jack scored higher than Jill. Jill, in a temper, pickedup her gun and aimed it at Jack. Jack believed he was about to be shot, and ran and jumped outof a nearby window, suffering serious injury in the fall. Jill says that she intended no harm, the gunwas unloaded and that she can’t believe the way Jack behaved.

Consider Jill’s position for liability under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, September 2001,Question 5.)


Topic

General Defences: Compulsion

Introduction

We have already noted the general defences available in respect of the mental element. In thisUnit, we will consider two other defences available; compulsion and justification.

Objectives

a To examine the scope of the defence of duress.b To consider the availability of self-defence as a defence.

Essential Reading



General Reading




DURESS AND COERCION

Abbott v R [1977] AC 755* DPP v Bell [1992] Crim LR 176DPP for Northern Ireland v Lynch [1975] 1 All ER 913; [1975] AC 653 (HL)R v Abdul-Hussain and Others [1999] Crim LR 570R v Bowen [1996] 2 Cr App R 157; [1996] 4 All ER 837 (CA)Holley [2005] UKPC 23R v Fitzpatrick [1977] NI 20* R v Flatt [1996] Crim LR 576 (CA)R v Gotts [1992] 2 AC 412; [1991] Crim LR 366; [1992] 2 WLR 284;[1992] 1 All ER 832 (HL)R v Graham (1982) 74 Cr App R 235; [1982] Crim LR 365; [1982] 1 WLR 294Antar [2006] EWCA 2708R v Howe [1987] 2 WLR 568; [1987] AC 417 (HL)R v Hudson and Taylor [1971] 2 All ER 244; [1971] 2 QB 202* R v Martin [2000] Crim LR 615Hasan [2005] 2 AC 467 (HL)

SELF-DEFENCE

Palmer v R [1971] 1 All ER 1077; [1971] AC 814R v Clegg [1995] 2 WLR 80; [1995] 1 All ER 334 (HL)Hatton [2006] 1 Cr App R247R v McInnes [1971] 3 All ER 295; [1971] 1 WLR 1600Kelleher [2003] EWCA Crim 3525Martin [2003] QB 1 (CA)R v Owino [1995] Crim LR 743 (CA)R v Scarlett [1993] 4 All ER 629R v Williams (Gladstone) (1984) 78 Cr App R 276R [on the Application of Bennet] v H.M. Coroner for Inner South London (2006) 170 JP 109Criminal Law Act 1967: s3 (reasonable force)

NECESSITY

A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation), Re [2000] 4 All ER 961 (CA)* Buckoke v Greater London Council [1971] 1 Ch 655; [1971] 2 All ER 254Jones v Gloucestershire CPS [2005] QB 259Jones [2006] UKHL 16R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273R v Martin [1989] 1 All ER 652; [1989] Crim LR 284; (1989) 88 Cr App R 343* R v Rodger and Another [1998] 1 Cr App R 143



1 What must be shown for the defence of duress to operate? What test should the jury be askedto consider?2 How may the defence of marital coercion be defined?3 What are the proposals of the Law Commission regarding duress, coercion and necessity?

4 What is the effect of s3 Criminal Law Act 1967 on the common law right of private defence andis s3 limited to a defence of person?5 How will the reasonableness or otherwise of an action be decided?

Sample Questions

1 What reasons did Lord Hailsham give in his judgment in Howe for disallowing the plea of duressto a charge of murder?Should the defence be available when D is charged:

a as principal in the second degree to murder (ie the helper, rather than the actual killer); orb as the actual killer; orc with attempted murder; ord with s18 OAP?(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

2 When, if ever, may criminal conduct be justified on grounds of necessity?(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)


Topic

Inchoate Offences

Introduction

Inchoate liability can be imposed upon a person who progresses some way towards committing acriminal offence, but does not necessarily succeed in completing the commission of the entire of-fence.

Objectives

a To examine the law of inchoate offences, in particular the differing requirements of mens reaand actus reus in the individual offences ofincitement, conspiracy and attempt.b To consider the pre-1981 law regarding the issue of impossibility and the changes brought aboutby the Criminal Attempts Act 1981.

Essential Reading



General ReadingThese titles have not been supplied and are not essential reading, but you may wish to refer tothem to further your understanding.

Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law, Smith and Hogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, Smith andHogan – Relevant Chapter(s)Principles of Criminal Law, Ashworth – Relevant Chapter(s)Criminal Law, Jefferson – Relevant Chapter(s)Cases and Materials on Criminal Law, Elliott and Wood – Relevant Chapter(s)


INCITEMENT

DPP v Armstrong [2000] Crim LR 379O’Shea [2004] Crim LR 365 (CA)DPP v Nock [1978] AC 979; [1978] 2 All ER 654* Invicta Plastics Ltd v Clare [1976] RTR 251; [1976] Crim LR 131R v Curr [1968] 2 QB 944; [1967] 1 All ER 478R v Fitzmaurice [1983] QB 1083* R v Most (1881) 7 QBD 244* R v Ransford (1874) 13 Cox CC 9R v Sirat [1986] Crim LR 245* R v Whitehouse [1977] 3 All ER 737; [1977] QB 868* Race Relations Board v Applin [1973] QB 815

CONSPIRACY

* Adams v R [1995] 1 WLR 52 (PC)* DPP v Doot [1973] AC 807DPP v Nock (above)R v Anderson [1985] 2 All ER 961; [1986] AC 27* R v Ayers [1984] 1 All ER 619; [1984] AC 447* R v Hollinshead [1975] 2 All ER 769; [1975] AC 975* R v O’Brien [1974] 3 All ER 663* R v Reed [1982] Crim LR 819Wai Yu-Tsang v R [1991] 4 All ER 664; [1991] 3 WLR 1006 (PC)

ATTEMPT

Anderton v Ryan [1985] 2 All ER 355; [1985] AC 560 (HL)* Comer v Bloomfield (1970) 55 Cr App R 305Haughton v Smith [1975] AC 476; [1973] 2 All ER 1109 (HL)* R v Bristol Magistrates’ Court, ex parte E [1998] 3 All ER 798* R v Campbell [1991] Crim LR 268; (1991) 93 Cr App R 350* R v Easom [1971] 2 QB 315R v Geddes [1996] Crim LR 894R v Gullefer [1990] 3 All ER 882* R v Jones (1990) 91 Cr App R 351; [1990] 1 WLR 1057; [1990] 3 All ER886 (CA)* R v Pearman [1984] Crim LR 675; (1985) 80 Cr App R 259R v Shivpuri [1987] AC 1; [1986] 2 All ER 334 (HL)* R v Walker & Hayles [1990] Crim LR 44; (1990) 90 Cr App R 226R v Whybrow (1951) 35 Cr App R 141* R v Widdowson [1986] Crim LR 233; (1986) 82 Cr App R 314Criminal Attempts Act 1981: ss1, 5 and 6Criminal Justice Act 1987: s12Criminal Law Act 1977: ss1 and 2 (conspiracy)Criminal Law 1



1 Define an attempt.2 What is the present law regarding impossibility in attempt?3 What is the mens rea for incitement?4 Define conspiracy.5 What is the mens rea required in a charge of conspiracy?

Sample Questions

1 Fred is unemployed and suffers from delusions. Fred decides to shoot Alan, his neighbour and asuccessful salesman, in the wild belief that he will then be able to have Alan’s job. Fred hides andas Alan is getting out of his car Fred shoots him. The bullet misses Alan but wounds Ann, Alan’spassenger.

Advise Fred of his liability in criminal law, if any, in respect of Alan and Ann.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, September 2001,Question 4.)

2 ‘If a person intends to commit a contemplated offence, it is immaterialthat the offence is in fact impossible to commit.’

Discuss.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 2001, Question 3.)3 Compare the law of attempt pre and post the Criminal Attempts Act1981.


Topic

Review: Problem-solving Exercises

Introduction

In this Unit, you will again reinforce your learning and understanding of the topics previously cov-ered by applying your knowledge to a series of mock situations. The following questions are de-signed to give further practice in tackling issues covered by Study Units 7–9.

Sample Questions

1 A knew she had AIDS and she had sexual intercourse with B, who did not know of A’s condition.A and B enjoyed consensual sadomasochistic sex, in the course of which A frequently whipped Buntil blood ran from the weals. On other occasions, B suffered bruising to various parts of thebody. B did not complain of this, but his friend noticed the injuries on B’s back and told the police.A states that she never thought about the injuries which might result and that B was awilling party to the activities. After undergoing a medical examination, B discovered that he wasHIV positive.

Examine the charges which might be faced by A.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

2 Andy was of a nervous disposition. He saw three youths walking towards him down a darkstreet. One of the youths, Basil, was carrying and swinging a bicycle chain. Andy was apprehen-sive that they were going to attack him. Andy crossed the road. The youths followed. Andy said:‘Not one step further or I’ll have to defend myself.’ The youths believed that they were beingthreatened. One ran away. Basil was unable to run because he had a heart illness. His brotherCharles stayed with him. Basil, who then began to feel very unwell, stumbled forward and fell onAndy, who believed he was being attacked and kicked Basil, inducing a severe heart attack.Charles entered the melee to protect his brother and kicked Andy before a passer-by stopped thefight. The youths had not intended to attack Andy but had been going to retrieve Basil’s brokenbicycle.

What crimes, if any, have been committed?(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

3 Soo owed money to Archoo who was threatening her with serious violence about its non-pay-ment. Soo was desperate and so Archoo said that he would let her off the debt if she killed Boo.Soo bought a quantity of arsenophine, which she was told by Tai, a chemist, was a deadly poisoneven in small amounts. She put a teaspoon of it into Boo’s tea. Boo fell to the ground after drinkinga small amount. Soo called an ambulance quickly, hoping that he would not die. Boo had in facthad a heart attack and the arsenophine was a harmless substance which had no effect on him atall. He recovered in hospital.

Discuss what charges might be brought against Soo and whethershe would have any defence.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning Question.)

Learning Project Suggested minimum study hours: 50

In common with all the modules that form part of the LLB by Distance Learning programme thismodule involves a Learning Project. Undergraduate students at the University of Wolverhamptonare required to demonstrate that they are capable of independent research before they can berecommended for the award of a degree. For distance learning students this is assessed by refer-ence to theLearning Project you undertake in respect of each module. It requires you to pay specific attentionto a list of defined reading. Commonly covering a range of cases and statutes you are required todemonstrate your mastery of the area(s) of law concerned by undertaking a compulsory questionas part of the end of module examination. This will commonly take the form of an extended legalproblem and require you to demonstrate not only that you understand the areas of law concernedbut are able to apply them clearly and without error. It could also take the form of an essay ques-tion requiring you to demonstrate an ability to comment on linked areas of law. Particular attentionwill be paid to the accuracy with which you cite the law and the arguments of those responsible foritsdevelopment. You will also be expected to demonstrate that you understand, and have not beenconfused by, the ambiguities and contradictions that exist in the undergraduate study of the law.

This question, which will change with each examination paper, will account for 50 per cent of theoverall grade and require you to devote one hour of the two-hour examination period to it. Pleasenote that for each examination you are allowed 15 minutes’ reading time on top of the two hoursyou have to write your answers. You may also take into the examination the relevant 150 LeadingCases and Statute Book. Please note that these may not contain any additional notes or mark-ings.

Learning Project for Criminal Law 1: Defences to Murder and Manslaughter

Essential Reading

Criminal Law Textbook (Chapters 4 and 14) Molan (4th edition 2006)Old Bailey Press

Criminal Law 150 Leading Cases (Relevant Chapter(s)) Molan (4thedition 2007) Old Bailey Press

Guidance notes

This Learning Project is covered by Units 2, 3 and 5 in your Module Planner. In carrying out yourreading and research you should have special regard to the following key points.

• The mens rea for murder/manslaughter.• The effect of diminished responsibility.• The effect of provocation.• Characteristics to be taken into account for provocation.• What is meant by abnormality of mind?• What is meant by insanity?• The connection between insanity and automatism.• Intoxication and crimes of specific and basic intent.


MURDER – SPECIFIC DEFENCES – PROVOCATION AND DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY(VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER)

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1997] 3 All ER 936 (HL)DPP v Camplin [1978] 2 All ER 168; [1978] AC 705 (HL)* Luc Thiet Than v R [1996] 2 All ER 1033; [1997] AC 131 (PC)* R v Acott [1997] 1 WLR 306; [1997] 1 All ER 706 (HL)R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1; [1960] 2 QB 396* R v Doughty [1986] Crim LR 625* R v Dryden [1995] 4 All ER 987 (CA)* R v Duffy [1949] 1 All ER 932* R v Egan [1992] 4 All ER 470* R v Fenton (1975) 61 Cr App R 261R v Gittens [1984] 3 All ER 252; [1984] QB 698* R v Humphreys [1995] 4 All ER 1008 (CA)* R v Ibrams and Gregory (1981) 74 Cr App R 154* R v Inseal [1992] Crim LR 35* R v McShane (1978) 66 Cr App R 97* R v Marks [1998] Crim LR 676R v Morhall [1995] 3 WLR 330; [1995] 3 All ER 659; [1996] 1 AC 90 (HL)* R v Newell (1980) 71 Cr App R 331* R v Pearson [1992] Crim LR 193* R v Richens [1993] Crim LR 384* R v Roberts [1986] Crim LR 122* R v Rossiter [1994] 2 All ER 752 (CA)R v Sanderson (1994) 98 Cr App R 325R v Seers [1985] Crim LR 85

R v Smith (Morgan) [2000] 4 All ER 289Weller [2004] 1 Cr App R 1 (CA)Holley v Attorney General for Jersey [2005] 2 AC 580Mohammed [2005] EWCA Crim 1880James [2006] 1 AER 759 (CA)R v Tandy (1988) 87 Cr App R 45; [1989] 1 All ER 267Dietschmann [2003] 1 AC 1209* R v Thornton (No 2) [1996] 2 All ER 1023 (CA)Homicide Act 1957: s2 (diminished responsibility)Homicide Act 1957: s3 (provocation)Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996INSANITYM’Naghten’s Case (1843) 10 C & F 200R v Hennessy [1989] 1 WLR 287; [1989] Crim LR 356R v Kemp [1957] 1 QB 399; [1956] 3 All ER 249R v Quick [1973] QB 910R v Stephenson [1979] QB 695R v Sullivan [1983] 2 WLR 392; [1984] AC 156R v Windle [1952] 2 All ER 1; [1952] 2 QB 826

NON-INSANE AUTOMATISM

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1992) [1993] 3 WLR 982; [1993] 4 All ER 683 (CA)Bratty v Attorney-General for Northern Ireland [1963] AC 386Broome v Perkins [1987] RTR 321R v Bailey [1983] 2 All ER 503; [1983] 1 WLR 760R v Burgess [1991] 2 All ER 769; [1991] 2 WLR 1206* R v T [1990] Crim LR 256Roach [2002] EWCA Crim 2700

INTOXICATION/EFFECT OF DRUGS

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1975) [1975] 3 WLR 11Attorney-General for Northern Ireland v Gallagher [1963] AC 349Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Caldwell [1981] 1 All ER 961; [1982] AC 341 (HL)DPP v Beard [1920] AC 479DPP v Majewski [1977] AC 443; [1976] 2 All ER 142Jaggard v Dickinson [1981] QB 527; [1981] 2 WLR 118* R v Allen [1988] Crim LR 698* R v Fotheringham [1988] Crim LR 846R v Hardie [1985] 1 WLR 64; [1984] 3 All ER 848R v Kingston [1994] 3 WLR 519; [1994] 3 All ER 353 (HL)R v Lipman [1970] 1 QB 152R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991


Sample Questions1 Arthur was an alcoholic. He had been involved in a car crash in which he was driving and hiswife and children were killed. Subsequently, his work suffered, and his employer, Jane, told himthat he was a drunken, murdering, useless waste of space. Arthur was incensed. He left Jane’soffice in a temper and rushed down to the car park where he spotted Jane’s car. He partly sawed

through the brake cables. Later that day, Jane was killed when her brakes failed and sheploughed into a tree.

Arthur was charged with murder. Discuss Arthur’s liability. Ignoring all other arguments aboutmens rea and actus reus, answer the following questions, explaining your answers.

a The defence receive a medical report confirming that Arthur is an alcoholic. Explain how thiscould be used in promoting the defence of diminished responsibility by reference to decided cas-es.

b As an alternative provocation could be put forward; illustrate how this could be used as a de-fence by Arthur.c What are the dangers for Arthur from the prosecution if the diminished responsi-bility argument is put forward by his defence?

d Can intoxication be a defence to murder?(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 1999, Question 1.)

2 Mac and Mable were husband and wife. They had been married for 13 years with a long historyof domestic violence. In the past Mac had abused Mable by beating her, burning her with a hotiron, and on several occasions he had knocked her unconscious with blows to the stomach.

One afternoon when Mac was asleep, Mable crept up to the bed and poured petrol all over himand set him alight. Mac died from the burns. Mable said that she had done this to ‘wash away hissins as God wants’. Mable is charged with murder.

Answer the following questions in the context of the above.

a The defence suggests putting forward the defence of diminished responsibility. Illustrate and ex-plain this defence.b If provocation were to be put forward as a defence, using cases to illustrate your answer, are thesubjective and objective conditions fulfilled?c Distinguish between automatism and insanity.d Consider whether it would make a difference to Mable’s defence if she had consumed threequarters of a bottle of vodka before pouring the petrol over Mac.(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, January 2001,Question 1.)

Practice Question and Suggested

Answer

The following test is designed for practice only and does NOT count as part of the assessmentregime. A Suggested Solution is, however, offered in the following section. Students are advisednot to consult this solution until they have completed the test. It is expected that you will returnyour answer to the College for marking and feedback.

Unless you undertake such work you will not gain an insight into your academic strengths andweaknesses before you attempt the examination.

Before attempting your answer, please ensure that you understand the assessment criteria ex-plained in the Award Guide, and the guidance contained in the section of the Module Plannerheaded ‘Skills to be Developed and examined’.

Question

Punch and Judy lived together for ten years. Punch knew Judy had wanted to leave him becauseof the brutal treatment he gave her. Punch always said that if Judy left him he would never restuntil he found her and killed her. One day Punch threw the meal Judy had made him at her claim-ing ‘this tastes like dog food!’. The plate cut Judy badly on the face. Judy felt determined to killPunch, as this was the only way to escape. Some hours later when Punch was asleep, Judy creptupstairs and stabbed him repeatedly with a bread knife. Judy is charged with murder.

Ignoring all other arguments about mens rea and actus reus answer the following.a Explain with reference to decided cases the main defence that Judy’s lawyer will put forward.b If alternatively the defence received a medical report suggesting Judy had some ‘abnormality’ ofmind, explain how it could use this as part of its argument.c If Judy had been drunk at the time she killed Punch explain whether this could be used as a de-fence to a murder charge.d Illustrate the connection between insanity and automatism.

(Wolverhampton LLB by Distance Learning, May 2001, Question 1.)

Suggested Answer to Practice

Question

NB: Do not consult this solution until you have completed the test.

Outline Answer

In answering this question, you should have regard to the following key points in particular.

• Defence of provocation; was Judy ‘provoked’? ‘Cooling time’ too long for the defence? Objectivetest and reasonableness.• Defence of diminished responsibility; ‘abnormality of the mind’?• Intoxication may be a relevant factor when establishing mens rea for a crime of specific intent.• Compare defences of insanity and automatism; internal and external factors; lack of mens rea.

Answer

Note: this answer is based on one written by a distance learning student covering the question setas part of an examination. a According to the circumstances, the lawyer will put forward the de-fence of provocation in respect of s3 of the Homicide Act 1957. The main essence of s3 of the Actis such that Judy may put forward evidence to show that she had been provoked by Punch, bythings that were done or said by Punch, to such an extent that Judy lost her self-control. It appearsthat Punch gave Judy brutal treatment and threatened her if she left him.

Section 3 of the Act indicates that it is left to the jury to determine whether such a provocation wasenough to make a reasonable person kill in reaction. Decided cases such as DPP v Camplin(1978) indicate some insight on how to interpret the ‘reasonable person’ test. Lord Diplock in hisspeech said that what the jury ought to consider was ‘not the reaction of a reasonable adult butthe reaction of a reasonable boy of the accused’s age’. The public policy that underlay the adop-tion of the ‘reasonable man’ test in the common law doctrine of provocation was to reduce the inci-dence of fatal violence by preventing a person relying on his own exceptional pugnacity orexcitability as an excuse for loss of self-control. Thus the exceptional bad temper of a personcould not be an excuse. It was also decided in DPP v Camplin (1978) that the ‘reasonable man’referred to is a person having the power of self-control to be expected of an ordinary person of thesex and age of the accused, but in other respects sharing such of the accused’s characteristics asthey think would affect the gravity of the provocation to the accused.In another case, R v Smith (Morgan) (2000), the Court of Appeal held that the evidence of thedefendant’s chronic alcoholism, that had damaged the left temporal lobe of his brain, ought tohave been taken into account when assessing the defence of provocation. In the case of Attor-ney General for Jersey v Holley (2005) a majority of the Privy Council refused to follow Smith andconsidered that the standard of a reasonable person had to be a constant objective standard in allcases. In Judy’s situation therefore, any mental abnormality could not be taken into account for thedefence of provocation. The statutory reasonable person has the power of self-control to be ex-pected of an ordinary person of the same sex and age. Since Judy has long been receivingbrutal treatment for almost ten years, Punch’s claim that her meal ‘tastes like dog food’ might trig-ger the sudden loss of self-control of Judy when the plate cut her badly on the face. However, weshould be cautious on the point that, some hours later when Punch was asleep, Judy killed him,as the prosecution may rebut the allegation of provocation because Judy had time to cool downbefore she determined to kill. If the judge is satisfied on the balance of probability that the eviden-tial burden in respect of the defence of provocation is acceptable, he would leave it to the jury todetermine whether the accused has been provoked sufficiently to kill. If the defence of provocation

is established, Judy will be guilty of manslaughter instead of murder. In the case of murder, themandatory sentence is life imprisonment.

b Judy’s lawyer may put forward the defence of diminished responsibility according to s2 of theHomicide Act 1957. It reads ‘… a person shall not be convicted of murder if he was suffering fromsuch abnormality of the mind (whether arising from a condition of arrested or retarded develop-ment of the mind or any inherent causes or induced by disease or injury) as substantially impairedhis mental responsibility for his acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing’. In thecase of R v Byrne (1960), Lord Parker explained that an ‘abnormality of the mind’ should be distin-guished from the M’Naghten Rules, which is a ‘defect of reason’. It appears that it covers themind’s activity in all its aspects, not only the perception of physical acts and matters, and the abili-ty to form a rational judgment whether the act is right or wrong, but also the ability to exercise willpower to control physical acts in accordance with that rational judgment. It is not known whetherthe medical report of Judy is sufficient to conclude that she has an ‘abnormality of the mind’. It is aquestion for the jury to decide. The jury are entitled to take into consideration all the evidence, in-cluding the acts or statements of the accused and her demeanour. They are not bound to acceptthe medical evidence, if there is other material before them which, in their good judgment, conflictswith it and outweighs it. If the defence of ‘abnormality of the mind’ is accepted by the jury, Judy willbe convicted of manslaughter instead of murder.

c In common law, murder is a ‘specific intent’ crime which means thatthe mens rea goes beyond the actus reus. Generally, intoxication canbe a defence to a specific intent crime. It has been established in common law that where a spe-cific intent is an essential element of the offence, evidence of a state of drunkenness rendering theaccused incapable of forming such an intent should be taken into consideration in order to deter-mine whether she had in fact formed the intent necessary to constitute the particular crime. If shewas so drunk that she was incapable of forming the intent required, she could not beconvicted of a crime which was committed only if the intent was proved. In a charge of murderbased upon intention to kill or to do grievous bodily harm, if the jury are satisfied that the accusedwas, by reason of her drunken condition, incapable of forming the intent to kill or to do grievousbodily harm, she cannot be convicted of murder.

However, if evidence shows that she had the intent to kill before she drank and the voluntarydrunkenness was such as to make her have the courage to kill, the situation is different and Judymay still be convicted of murder.

d The case of R v Sullivan (1984) demonstrates the connection between insanity and automatism.In their Lordship’s views, insanity should be based on the M’Naghten Rules; for a defence on theground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the partyaccused was labouring under a defect of reason, from a disease of the mind, and was not to knowthe nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, then he did not know that whathe was doing was wrong. ‘Mind’ in the M’Naghten Rules is used in the ordinary sense of the men-tal faculties of reason, memory andunderstanding. If the effect of a disease is to impair these faculties so severely as to have either ofthe consequences referred in the Rules, it matters not whether the aetiology of the impairment isorganic, as in epilepsy, or functional, or whether the impairment itself is permanent or is transientand intermittent, provided that it subsisted at the time of the commission of the act. On the otherhand, automatism refers to cases where temporary impairment results from some external factor,causing the involuntary action of the accused. There is another definition laid down in Bratty v At-torney-General for Northern Ireland (1963). ‘Automatism’ means an act which is done by the mus-cles without any control by the mind, such as a spasm, a reflex action or a convulsion, or an actdone by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing, such as an act done whilst sufferingfrom concussion or whilst sleep-walking. Automatism is a complete defence and the accused willbe released if the defence is accepted by the jury. On the other hand, the jury may find the ac-

cused ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’ and the accused will be kept in custody in a mental hospitalpermanently. It may be said that there is a need, for social policy reasons, todistinguish between the two, for example because in the case of insanity due to inherent diseaseof the mind, which is prone to reoccur and manifest itself in violence, it is better to keep the ac-cused in a mental hospital.

Marker’s comment on Student Answer

The following observations can be made about this student answer.1 It identified the points of law required to be discussed in each part of the question.2 It gave a sufficiently accurate definition of that relevant point of law by reference to either an Actof Parliament or a decided case.3 It explained in ordinary language the meaning of the relevant law and by using cases further ex-plained how the law has developed.4 It applied the law to the facts of the scenario and thus reached a conclusion.5 It considered the defences which the facts of the scenario suggested might be available to thedefendant.6 Where relevant, comment was made upon any shortcomings in the substantive law or the avail-able defences and suggestions were put forward for any changes or reforms which might be con-sidered. The answer was clearly written and contained few spelling and grammatical errors.Importantly, the answer was written following a logical sequence making it easy to read and thusmark. Cases could have been underlined, although a student in an examination might nothave enough time to do this. Each part of the question commenced on a separate page and there-fore it was very easy for any examiner to identify where each part of the question began and end-ed.

Revision

What to revise

Consider carefully what you have been told about the format of the examination. How many ques-tions will you be required to answer in what length of time? Work out how long you are likely tohave to write an answer to any one question.

Look at past exam papers. A sample can be accessed via the School of Legal Studies websitewww.wlv.ac.uk/sls. They may help you to identify the questions which are most likely to appear onyour exam; and on which you can concentrate your revision. This is known as question spottingand, although this is not advisable, it may sometimes be necessary. If you have to do this, youshould revise two additional topics just in case: the question on one of the topics on which youhave concentrated most may be phrased in such a way that you are not certain how to answer it.It is, however, safer to deal with every topic in the module so that you are prepared for all ques-tions.

By looking at past exam papers you may also be able to determine whether certain topics tend tobe examined by way of problem scenarios or general discussion questions. Structure your revisionto accommodate the different approaches those two different types of question require.

Look closely at the topics covered by the module. Those topics which have been given the great-est emphasis are a good bet to appear in the exam.

The question in the Learning Project is compulsory so make sure that your revision is thorough onthe topic, or topics, it covers.

Planning your revision

The best method of revision is to revise continuously throughout your study of a module, butwhether you revise continuously or prefer the last minute approach, try to relax on the day beforean exam. To do well you need to be both physically and mentally fit.

Well before the exam period make yourself a revision calendar. Make sure that the revision periodyou plan is long enough to cover all of the modules you have studied, and gives you regularbreaks away from your studies. You need to start your revision at least two weeks before the ex-amination period. It is not wise to plan to revise for more than an hour at a time without a shortbreak. You should build in some days in which you put revision aside altogether and do somethingwhich will take your mind off the upcoming exam period.

Don’t just divide the revision period equally between topics. Make a realistic appraisal of whichtopic(s) you are weakest in and plan to give them the most time. In deciding how much time togive each topic you should also take into account how much the exam counts towards your overallmark. In other words, plan your revision to do best on exams which will give you the most benefitin terms of your overall results.

Do not concentrate all your revision of any one topic in a solid block. You will find that your con-centration will be better if you rotate your revision from topic to topic.

Plan your revision of any one topic in stages. The first stage is to acquire a knowledge of the topic.This involves re-reading your notes and whatever is necessary in your books. The second stage isto break that knowledge down into easily remembered key components. The third stage is to honeyour ability to identify issues and relate them to those key components. This is best accomplishedby writing answers to past exam questions.

How to revise

If you have any general problems with your studying, don’t just sit there hoping it will come right inthe end; contact the Module Leader or the College.

There are a number of stages in the revision process. First you have to ensure that you have anadequate knowledge of the topics. This is a matter of re-reading notes and filling in gaps by read-ing relevant sections of your Textbook or other materials until you have reached the point whereyou understand the material being dealt with.

While you are reviewing your notes and other study materials, you should be identifying and mark-ing key points which you can return to when you start to make your revision notes.

Remember: revision can only be effective if it is based on a previously acquired basic knowledgeand understanding of the topics.

The second stage of revision is to create a set of revision notes.

These will be aimed at (1) setting out key points and (2) relating these to each other in such a waythat they form a coherent picture of a particular topic (3) identifying key cases and/or statutory pro-visions which you need to know details of.

There are numerous ways of structuring revision notes. Which you choose will be a matter of per-sonal preference. The basic aims, however, are to create a set of notes which you can reviewquickly many times; and one from which you can retain a vivid mental image so that you will beeasily able to recall them in the examination.

Therefore your revision notes should be made up of key words and phrases. Each entry in thenotes should represent a condensation of information about the topic at hand. Strike a balancebetween brevity and comprehensiveness. Some concepts may be too complicated to rememberwithout a detailed note. Others readily lend themselves to summing up in a phrase of even a wordor two. A rule of thumb is to confine all the revision notes on one topic to one page or less of A4paper.

Using different colours for different topics, or writing the notes so that they create a distinctive pat-tern on the page, is a way of creating a vivid mental image of your notes. During the exam youmay be able to recall the particular information you need by calling up a ‘picture’ of the informa-tion. A stepped outline or a spider diagram are two of the ways you can create a pattern which willhelp you to recall information by focussing on the image and the way it was written down. Spiderdiagrams are especially useful for creating an image of the way ideas or rules link together.

Your friends may think you have become very eccentric but it is a good idea to stroll about yourroom reciting out loud the contents of a page of revision notes. This, after all, is how actors learntheir lines before a performance, and you are doing the same thing when you set out to learn yourrevision notes before an exam.

You may be tempted to shortcut the process of building up a set of your own revision notes bybuying one of the many revision guides which are available. These can be extremely useful to giveyou a very condensed overview of a topic, but remember this: what makes for exam success isdisplaying to the examiner your own knowledge of the topic. The only way to create your ownknowledge of the topic is to create your own set of revision notes using all those other sources

The third stage of revision is self-testing. Pick a question from a past exam – and this is wherehaving made a considered choice about which topics to revise is essential – and write an answerto it under ‘exam conditions’: ie taking the length of time you would be given to do the question inthe exam. Then go back over your revision notes on that topic and see what you have left out,what you did wrong and what you put in that was not really relevant to the question asked.

You may want to return to your original notes from lectures and reading and have another look atthat material. After half an hour or more break, pick another question on the same topic and writean answer to it. Go through the same review process again. Repeat the whole process once ortwice more. The advantages of doing this will soon become apparent. You will identify weakness-es in your knowledge and/or understanding. You will see how some components of an answer to aquestion on a particular topic will re-appear over and over again no matter how the question isworded, and you will have written those bits down often enough that you will not have to spendtime in the exam trying to work out how to phrase that part of your answer.

The benefit of self-testing is enormously enhanced if you do it as part of a group. Three or four ofyou working together will amongst you have a very comprehensive knowledge of any topic. Whatyou are weak on, you can pick up from one of the others and vice versa. There is also the psycho-logical boost which comes from working as part of a team. You will find that some of the thingsyou thought it was important to write about completely eluded other members of the group. Also,you will not have seen some important point which they did. Discussing all of your answers togeth-er will help you to craft a complete answer to all of the aspects of the question. If you are not incontact with fellow distance learning students, ask members of your family or friends to test you.As well as helping you, this will give them a valuable insight into how much your studiesmean to you and the hard work involved.

Taking the Examination

Hints for Answering QuestionsThe very first thing you must do is to read the whole question. If the question is a problem:

DOAsk yourself:• Why am I being asked to advise this person?• What has gone wrong?• What are the areas of law involved?

If the question is an essay:

DOAsk yourself:• What area of law does the essay cover?• Which part of that area of law is the essay asking me to discuss?• Which points do I have to focus on in answering the question?

DO NOT, IN EITHER TYPE OF QUESTION• Start writing before you have read the whole question.• Identify one area of law and write all you know about that area without putting it into the contextof the question.

The next step is to write an outline plan of your answer. In this plan, you should identify the mainpoints in the problem. If you do not want the plan to be taken into account in your answer, thencross it through and your examiner will ignore it. When you are writing your answer, follow yourplan. This will help you avoid discussing areas of law which are not relevant to the question. It willalso help you ensure that you cover all the points raised in the question and do so in alogical, reasoned way. After you have read the question and written your outline plan you shouldre-read the question and then attempt the answer.

WRITING THE ANSWER

In writing your answer, start at the beginning and work through to the end. Make sure that youdeal with each issue raised and that you apply the law to the relevant points. Reach a conclusionat the end. Do not start with your conclusion as you may find, part of the way through your answer,that you realise your original conclusion was wrong and you will have to start again.

Always give authorities for your answers. These authorities will be statutes and/or cases.

DO• Address the issues from the start of your answer.• Start at the beginning and work through to the end.• Reach a conclusion at the end.• Relate your answer to specific points in the question.• Give authority for every point of law you make.• Write clearly and in good English.• Time your answers.

DO NOT• Write all you know about the area before you start actually answering the question; you will onlyhave to write it out again in dealing with the specific points in the question.• Reach a conclusion at the beginning.• Move away from the structure of your outline plan.• Give unsupported statements of law.• Spend so long answering one question that you do not have enough time to answer the rest.• Write in note form (unless you have spent too much time on your previous answers and are leftwith insufficient time to write a full answer).• Copy large amounts of material from the books you are allowed to take into the examination.Make sure that you put all quotations in quotation marks otherwise you may be thought to havebeen cheating.

Module Questionnaire

Criminal Law 1

The School of Legal Studies and Holborn College attach great importance to your views. Wewould, therefore, be grateful, if now that you have finished studying this module, you would an-swer the following questions and return them to the address give below. Your answers will be con-sidered by the distance learning teaching team and used in updating teaching materials.

1 What two things did you find most useful about the materials youwere provided with for this module?________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________

2 What two things did you find least helpful about the materials youwere provided with for this module?________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________

3 Please identify any typographical errors you encountered in using thisplanner (please make reference to appropriate page numbers).________________________________________________________________

___________________________

Return to:External Programmes AdministratorSchool of Legal StudiesUniversity of WolverhamptonArthur Storer BuildingMolineux StreetWolverhamptonWV1 1SBUnited KingdomYou may if you wish e-mail your answers to [email protected]

distance learning module planner - asp2 home page law 1.pdf · the above in relation to this...

Documents