Criminal Law Assignment Sample 2

• Type Assignment
• Downloads1134
• Pages6

Introduction

Get free samples written by our Top-Notch subject experts for taking online Assignment Help services.

Unlawful Act Manslaughter

• A legal duty of Victim
• The victim failed to perform a particular legal duty
• the failure is negligent in eyes of law
• The failure of performance duty becomes the reason for the death of victim

A. Intentionally doing an act

This form of act happens when people intentionally do things that are unlawful and may be dangerous for people or for them. Intention matters more in these scenario and refers to purposefully harming or damaging.

Issue

The intent for murder in this activity is referred to the intention of killing that causes Grievous Bodily Harm (GHM)^[1]. The necessary intents found that if the defendant has an intention to ensure the death of the victim is coming under this unlawful act.

Rule

As per the case study, it is seen that James has an intension to provoke dogs with his cane because people are not usually carried cane to walk into the park.

Application

The daily basis cane carrying is not a usual thing and this reason takes the vision of Adam for entire life. This is seemed to be a grievous crime that is intentionally doing. It is summarised in section 63 of the SA 2020 because the cause of defendants gives a harmful impact on victims^[2].The impact is grievous because Adam has lost his vision.

Conclusion

It must conclude here that this act is finding the cause of vision lost and relating it to the intention of the defendant.

B. The act is unlawful

This action may or may not be harmful; however, it is unlawful. This aspect means this type of action do not abide the justice or legal system. Furthermore, it can harm the right of public or any individual. On the contrary, a person associated with this act may not be aware of the circumstances or situation, which can change the whole aspect.

Issue

Manslaughter is often summarised as unlawful because it is not necessary that the defendant has a concrete intention to harm the victims. Sometimes, they are unaware of the result of their conduct and the harsh incident that has occurred to them.

Rule

Section 20 refers to the abolition of liability for manslaughter in a corporation that rejects the application in front of a common-law offence. The unincorporated association in offence does not directly appeal to defendants because association in murder does not totally depend on the activity of the defendant always.

Application

• According to Rv Lamb [1967] 2QB 981, if an unlawful act occurs by no assault the victim is not aware of the personal violence the victim has not to be referred to as a manslaughter charge. In the case study, it is concluded that James has done dangerous action with Adam, it can be said here that he has an oblique intention in the form of a consequence process to lead the victim to a result for all conduction has been done. The Mark is emotionallyprovoked because of his friendinjury therefore, it can not be said that it is a criminal offence but from the ethical manner the Mark is also reliable for criminals’ activities.

Conclusion

The assault has not to be done because it cannot be right to say that Mark has a motive to harm James with its unlawful conduct. It is seen here that James done criminal offence with Adam therefore Mark has been angry with James and this angriness led him to criminal offence of pushing James.

Battery law is a common offence but it is not presented here because both Actus reus and Mens Rea are not presented in case law. The case study demonstrated that Mark pushed James because of Adam’s eye injury; therefore, both the attributes of Battery is not applied here.

C. The act is dangerous

This is a kind of action that can harm people associated with the act both physically and mentally. This aspect causes a serious issue in law enforcement and implementing safety. However, the person may be aware or unaware.

Issue

The church test is a trial that is preceded by a judge based on the consideration that the unlawful act by the defendant is dangerous or not on the basis of Rv Church [1966] 1QB 59. The reasonable background has to be searched by the judge whether the act is done by an intention or not. As per the case study, it is evident that James is not a good guy because he suddenly strikes swinging the cane on Ruby that is an innocent animal. The guilt found in the act of a defendant is mainly defined in Church Test to find out the real reason for the act that leads the victim to grave injury or death.

Rule

Another case study of Rv JF and NE [2015] demonstrates that James the main offender because of him Adam has to suffer vision lost. He is only saving his 8 month dog that is not dangerous for any people. In this circumstance, the Church Test proceeds that the vision lost cause is reasonable or not. Both the James and Mark person finds guilty and not for the consequence accident that has occurred. It must be concluded here that it is not all about some harm. “Some harms” do not come under manslaughter but the death application of the victim comes under the manslaughter act.

D. The act causes death

When an act causes death it is a serious matter for the person who did and the inflicted person. This factor is important to consider in this case as it is a violation of people’s personal right.

References

Robson, M., Gross Negligence Manslaughter and the Culpable Doctor. The Journal of Criminal Law [2020]. Doctors Are Aggrieved—Should They Be? Gross Negligence Manslaughter and the Culpable Doctor. The Journal of Criminal Law, 84(4), pp.312-340.

Kamaluddin, Mechanical profiles of murder and murderers: An extensive review [2018]. Malays. J. Pathol, 40(10).

Larkin Jr, Are criminals bad or mad: Premeditated murder, mental illness, and Kahler v. Kansas. Harv. JL & Pub 2020. Harv. JL & Pub. Pol'y, 43, p.85.

Homicide: Murder and Manslaughter https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter#:~:text=be%20found%20here.-,Unlawful%20Act%20Manslaughter,from%20which%20death%20inadvertently%20resulted. [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

legislation.gov.UK https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

Offences against the Person, incorporating the Charging Standard

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/offences-against-person-incorporating-charging-standard [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

Parliament.uk https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd970724/gneral05.htm [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

R v Dawson and others [1985] 81 Cr App R 150 http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Dawson-and-others.php [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

R v Watson [1989] 2 All ER 865 http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Watson.php [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

R v Ball [1989] Crim LR 730 Court of Appeal http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/R-v-Ball.php [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

^[1]Robson, M., Gross Negligence Manslaughter and the Culpable Doctor. The Journal of Criminal Law [2020]. Doctors Are Aggrieved—Should They Be? Gross Negligence Manslaughter and the Culpable Doctor. The Journal of Criminal Law, 84(4), pp.312-340.

Kamaluddin, Mechanical profiles of murder and murderers: An extensive review [2018]. Malays. J. Pathol, 40(10).

Larkin Jr, Are criminals bad or mad: Premeditated murder, mental illness, and Kahler v. Kansas. Harv. JL & Pub 2020. Harv. JL & Pub. Poly, 43, p.85.

^[2] Homicide: Murder and Manslaughter https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter#:~:text=be%20found%20here.-,Unlawful%20Act%20Manslaughter,from%20which%20death%20inadvertently%20resulted. [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

legislation.gov.UK https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

Offences against the Person, incorporating the Charging Standard

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/offences-against-person-incorporating-charging-standard [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]

Parliament.uk

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd970724/gneral05.htm [Accessed on 23 Feb 2022]