H was a world famous darts player. He was demonstrating his skill at
an outdoor fete in aid of a charity. H offered 50 to anyone who would
place an apple on his head and permit H to throw a dart at it. H
contemplated the risk of hitting such a person. I volunteered, placing
the apple on his head. H threw the dart but sudden gust of wind caused
the dart to deviate from trajectory and hit I’s ear. I’s blood dripped
onto I’s coat. The dart continued on to hit an electric cable, setting
fire to a fete tent.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
In advising H of his criminal liability, the possible charges that can
be brought against him are under the OFFENCES AGAINST PERSONS ACT 1861
for the injury caused against I, for criminal damage when the blood
dripped on to I’s coat and when the tent caught on fire.
I’s Injury
When the dart that H threw had injured I’s ear. He could be charged
under the OFFENCES AGAINST PERSONS ACT (OAPA) 1861. The first offence
is under S18 of the same Act, where it is defined as an offence when a
person maliciously wounds or causes grievous bodily harm with the
intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The injury to I’s ear would
constitute a wound. As a wound has been defined in JJC v Eisenhower as
that the inner and outer skin must be broken. Further blood must spilt
even one drop is enough. This is satisfied on the fact as I was
bleeding.
The mens rea for S 18 is intention to cause grievous bodily harm.
Being a specific intent crime it has to be proof that the defendant
must intent the act and also the consequences. According to R v Bryson
and R v Belfon, intention must be proved and that recklessness is not
sufficient. Applying this to the question, it is difficult to
establish the required mens rea , as H only intended the act of
throwing the dart but as regard to the consequence he only
Nearly every aspect of law enforcement has a court decision that governs criteria. Most court rulings are the result of civil lawsuit towards a police officer and agency. However, currently, there is no law that mandates law enforcement driver training. When it comes to firearms, negligence by officers has resulted in a multitude of court rulings. Popow v. City of Margate, 1979, is a particularly interesting case that outlines failed firearms training by an agency. In this case, an officer chasing a suspect during a foot pursuit fired at the suspect, striking and killing an innocent bystander (Justia.com, 2017). The court ruled that the agency was “grossly negligent” of “failure to train” (Justia.com, 2017). As a result, nearly every agency requires annual firearms training and has written policy concerning the same. Officers must show proficiency in firearms use every year to maintain their certification. Many states even impose fines on officers for
Crime Scenario: This case is about a missing 9 year old boy who lives with his mother, younger sister, and his mother 's boyfriend. The child has been missing for over 24 hours and the boyfriend seems very protective of the mother and answers most of the questions about the disappearance. The scene is overwrought with the media, neighbors, and volunteers offering to help with the search for the missing boy.
In one of Law & Order’s “ripped from the headlines” episodes titled “House Counsel,” a juror in a mob trial is found dead. Law enforcement investigates and learns that the mobster tampered with the juror in order to avoid a conviction and then killed him to keep him quiet. The lawyer defending the mobster is a good friend of Assistant District Attorney Jack McCoy. Later in the investigation, McCoy discovers that his friend may have played a role in the jury tampering. When he suspects his friend is involved, McCoy sees an opportunity to get the mobster and prosecutes the attorney for the murder to leverage information about the mobster. In the end, the lawyer is convicted and the attorney-client privilege between the lawyer and the mobster is dissolved.
Ever since the start of using courts, the main goal of it was to deliver a fair environment where the accused could defend themselves and show the jurors that he/ she did not commit the crime that they were accused of. Sometimes this system fails us and they sentence an innocent man to jail for something they didn’t commit. The activity that I observed in the field of criminal justice was I went to the boulder court house and watched one of the cases that’s was happening that day. As I sat there watching I saw the defendant’s lawyer trying to convince the jurors that his client was innocent, I thought to myself: how can we improve the court room. Sometimes we see some cases where the criminal can be let go because of not a lot of evidence like Casey Anthony. We also might see that the case might be unfair to person being convicted of a crime that they didn’t do. An example of this is the jurors have some past experience with a person of that race and they don’t like them or they already come with a decision before they even hear the evidence found. We might also see a case where the jurors decide that the accuser is innocent even though there’s evidence that proves otherwise. The main point is how we can make
there. The thing was incredibly weak, and he took it in hand. Mason proceeded to
My homicide case began when the Shreveport Police Department (SPD) received a call from a male caller via 911 reporting he found a body of a black male found in a park near a cul-de-sac in a residential area. I was dispatched and responded to the scene. Upon arrival, I began steps documenting the crime scene. I initiated a rough sketch of the scene and initiated my field notes. A cordon was initiated as I began identifying possible evidence and identifying witnesses and suspects. I canvassed the area and found four 9mm shell casings near the body.
For our second lesson in Critical Thinking I am choosing to explore Option # 2: different factors that impact a person’s criminal culpability. When one discusses the different factors that impact a person’s criminal culpability, a review of how responsible the offender is for the crime committed and the four levels of mens rea or criminal intent listed in order of severity or culpability (purposely, knowingly, recklessly, negligently).
In this essay, I will be examining how the court system can fail to deliver justice for particular cases and people’s circumstances, as well as looking at alternatives to court, like circle sentencing, restorative sentencing and alternatives for children to the formal court system, as outlined in the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW). Crime is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. On the other side of this is justice; the quality of being fair and reasonable.
The role of criminal justice professionals is to preserve and uphold the Constitution by enforcing laws, protecting citizen’s rights and promoting justice for all. Police officers in the field of duty must be able to discern situations to be able to act in the most appropriate manner as it relates to their job. In this case study, Officer Smith is threatened with being penalized for making a decision he thinks is good community policing, but his Lieutenant feels he violated protocol. Officer Smith responds to a domestic dispute between an intoxicated husband and wife. Normal procedure would be to arrest the husband and put him in jail until the decision is made whether or not to press charges. Instead, Officer Smith decides to intervene and asks the couple questions about if they love each other, and why they are physically assaulting each other. They respond they do love each other, but the alcohol makes them violent towards one another. Officer Smith then recommends counseling for the couple, as an alternative to putting the husband in jail. The couple agrees to
The entire criminal justice system can be very frightening and even intimidating if someone fails to understand the meaning of terms used, procedures, laws, and rules (Cook, 2009). Criminal law is among the terms that have been defined differently by various sources. It is mainly concerned with a system of legal rules defining actions that are classified as crimes and the manner of which the government prosecutes people who commit crimes (Snyman, 2014). According to the chapter, some sources use it in a way that is very general that describes it as the entire spectrum of laws that deal with the criminal justice system while others use shorthand ways which terms it as substantive criminal law, which is very true.
There are several factors contributing to whether or not certain behaviours are criminalized by law in a society.
Written regulations in today 's society defines criminal behaviour (Morley & Hall, 2003, p. 2). Morley & Hall (2003) state that there is three ways of defining criminal behaviour. The first approach is that criminal behaviour is defined as one engaging in criminal acts that are against the written regulations of society, this can lead to those being punished by law; arrested and convicted. The second approach when defining criminal behaviour is to follow the criteria set in place when diagnosing those with Antisocial Personality Disorder, as this disorder is linked with a high risk of committing criminal activities. The final approach to defining criminal behaviour according to Morley & Hall (2003) is to take into account personality traits of individuals, such as aggression, as it is normally associated with high levels of criminal activity. (p. 2).
Given the details of the case mentioned on Page 137 of the text, there are multiple applicable acts that should be considered criminal and therefore up for trial. The following actions that can be taken by Chopra for personal injury(battery), false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution are common law intentional torts and should be actionable in a civil court.
The primary role of particular criminal justice agencies in the criminal court system is to make an appropriate, objective and determine decision while fulfilling their duties. For example, judges are able to interpret and apply law on particular circumstances; and police collect evidence and investigate crime through proper and legal ways, as they are all restrict to the legal regulation and bureaucratic administration (Findlay, Odgers, & Yeo, 2009, p. 21). To maintain the interests of defendants as well as public interest by avoiding innocent individual to a miscarriage of justice and giving a prompt and certain punishment to guilty individual, it is very important that each criminal justice agencies can fulfill their duties in a lawful manner, especially the legal representative. A legal representative is an individual representing defendant in court to defense and make decision for them, which means the legal representative is the only one stays at the same side as the defendant and cares the interests of the defendant. Therefore, in this report we will examine to what extent is the role of legal representation important in Local Court and Supreme Court.
In all Australian legal jurisdictions, children under the age of ten are considered to be too young to have criminal intent. That means, that children under this age cannot be held legally responsible for their actions. Australia is the only region in the world to have uniform legal guidelines on the lower age limit of criminal responsibility. (Weijers, Grisso 2009 p.45). Having the presumption that children under the age of ten are unable to know the law completely, therefore not being able to have mens rea, is in my opinion, necessary in our criminal courts. This essay will look at the reasons for the necessary use of the minimum age of criminal responsibility, such as the Beijing rules, the convention