Working through The Full Code Test within, The Code for Crown Prosecutors enables the conclusion to be reached as to whether Harry should be charged in accordance with s47 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861, for assault occasioning actual bodily harm ('ABH'). For conviction, prosecutors would demonstrate the actus reus and mens rea of ABH, in this case that Harry assaulted and caused the actual bodily harm to Rob and reckless or intended the assault. Lord Hope in R (on the application of Purdy) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2009] UKHL 45, stated that "prosecution does not follow automatically whenever an offence is believed to have been committed". In this judgment, Lord Hope echoed Sir Hartley Shawcros's statement made in the …show more content…
The level of seriousness of the offence committed, the suspects' culpability, circumstances of and harm to the victim is one of the first considerations in the public interest stage. ABH is a serious triable either way Class C offence involving violence, with the Assault Definitive Guideline laying out an offence range of a fine to three years' custody. The three witness statements identify Harry as solely culpable for Rob's assault, Harry may not have wished to assault Rob before the argument, however, intent in taking the deliberate premeditated action of pushing Rob resulting in the unlawful assault occurring. Harry being a university student is a factor that may increases public interest in seeing Harry prosecuted as the end result to Harry studying the course may allow Harry a career where assault is a bar to employability, therefore, safeguarding the public. It is not known if Rob is a vulnerable person, or Harry was motivated by any form of discrimination against Rob, therefore, the circumstances of the victim alone does not push for Harry to be charged. The impact the offence has on Rob has not been supplied, therefore, no consideration from this point can support charging Harry, although it is known stitches were required. The facts do not provide any reason for the prosecution not to go ahead based on the likelihood to have a detrimental effect on Rob's physical or mental health. The impact on the community as an inclusive term is another factor that prosecutors look at to see if there is public interest in bringing a prosecution. In Harry's case, ABH is a violent offence and it is in the interest of those not only in the nightclub that were in the vicinity of the incident,
In the present case there are two possible prosecutions to discuss. Jerome may be guilty of ‘controlling or coercive behaviour’ under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. While Talia may be guilty of assault under section 20 or section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act (OAPA) 1861.
Symbolism is very important in Oscar Wilde's "The Importance of Being Earnest." It is the symbolism that mocks the upper-class of the Victorian Era. Without comprehending and embracing the symbolism of the story, the story cannot make sense. But with context and accurate understanding of the symbols used, the story's message is a powerful one. Some symbols used in the story are food, Lady Bracknell, and the act of Bunburying.
This paper assumes that a police officer may or may not have “probable cause to arrest a defendant for armed assault” (AIU, 2016, para 1). I will address if the police officer had probable cause to believe that there is a person hiding in the third person’s garage, attached to the house (AIU, 2016, para 1). Accordingly, the police officer may need or not a warrant “to enter the garage to arrest the defendant” (AIU, 2016, para 2). An examination to “if the officer is in hot pursuit with the defendant” (AIU, 2016, para 2), and if the defendant is known to be injured and armed” (AIU, 2015, para 2). In addition, explain if the police officer probable cause to arrest and search the A and B residences.
I hope you’ve been well. Recently you wrote to us that you have accidentally wounded your friend Tony Brioschi. As you’ve described it, you are trying to punch the man who made offensive remark on you, but you punched on your friend Tony’s face. And next day he did seen a doctor, with a black and swollen eye. He is painful and quite angry about the incident. Specifically, you have asked for advice on the question whether you caused any civil or criminal liability. After researching the issue, and based on the facts set out below, I believe that a court would likely conclude that you did assault in the third degree (A misdemeanor). I will explain this conclusion more fully below after first setting out the facts as I understand them.
These problems have been highlighted by Sheriff Maciver who stated in a government document that “There is absolutely no doubt that the existence of a third verdict causes confusion for juries…this is a real problem which regularly requires to be dealt with” This view is echoed by the Victim Support Scotland who further call the ‘not proven’ verdict “confusing” This shambolic verdict has now also been described as “illogical, confusing and potentially stigmatising. ” It is now time for the legal hierarchy to surly concede that the ‘not proven’ verdict has passed its sell by date and needs to be removed from Scotland’s already crumbling out of date legal
On Bloodsworth’s appeal he argued several points. First he argued that there was not sufficient evidence to tie Bloodsworth to the crime. The courts ruled that the ruling stand on the grounds that the witness evidence was enough for reasonable doubt that the c...
...usion to this coursework, the mens rea of murder has many different elements such as within the element of intention which includes direct and oblique intent. It is clear that whether Nedrick or Woolin provides a definition or evidence of intention is undecided. In relation to recklessness, we understand that recklessness is not always an issue within the mens rea of murder. Recklessness is either Cunningham [1957] subjective and Caldwell objective. Finally I took negligence and strict liability into consideration with the mens rea of murder. Negligence within mens rea falls below the standard to be expected of the reasonable man. Strict liability does not require Mens Rea to be proved in relation to one or more Actus Reus elements. Finally to conclude the mens rea of murder is to kill or cause GBH, with the involvement of each of the above elements to be included.
...ould be to do an enquiry on the person that is providing the statement to Police to find out if in the past they have told Police lies or incorrect information. Police probably would not rely on the statements of the six patrons from the club if they were drinking in the Club at the time of the assault due to them possibly being intoxicated by alcohol and the possibility that their thought process could be compromised.
David Ormerod (eds.): Smith and Hogan Criminal Law,12th Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2008, ISBN 978-0199202584, pp 34
The idea of victim-oriented crime prevention holds that the majority of victimisation that occurs centres around a relatively small percentage of the population and that targeting crime prevention efforts and policy at potential or prior victims can prevent a large quantity of crime (Riley and Mayher 1980). In Garland’s (2001) investigation he observed that a reduced public confidence in the criminal justice system and its capability to reduce crime has led to victim treatment as playing a more important role in creating reform. In considering victims during criminal processes and law-making, the standard of efficiency in our system has been critically analysed and led to changes in a variety of areas. The development of official definitions of what constitutes victimhood and increased recognition of victims has helped legitimise and validate the criminal justice system.
The actus reus includes the terms “destroy”, “damage”, “property” and “belonging to another”, which Elizabeth has substantially done. Besides, it also includes “without lawful excuse”, which is provided under section 5(2) of the Act : (a) persons whom he believed to be entitled to consent to the destruction of or damage o the property; or (b) in order to protect property and the means of protection would be reasonable. However, Elizabeth do not satisfied any lawful excuse. The men rea for this offence requires intention or recklessness of damaging or destroying the property. Elizabeth did not have a direct intention to damage or destroy the property, as her purpose was to “enliven her afternoon”. However, she might have caused the damage or destruction by recklessness. The recklessness was meant to connote foresight of consequence is apparent from the Law Commission’s Report, and is reinforced by the proposed definition of recklessness from Law Commission. Subjective test for recklessness is used in this case, which defined in Cunningham (1957). She would not commit an offence of criminal damage unless she subjectively reckless as to the risk of damaging the road.
...calls for the disclosure of offences reported to the police and authorities (Sloan and Fisher, 2011, pg. 196). However, college students, similar to the general population, for whatever reason, often do not report their victimization of crime to the authorities (Sloan and Fisher, 2011, pg. 196-197). Thus researches know that even vast sweeping laws like the Jeanne Clery act likely underreport the true level of crime on campus (Sloan and Fisher, 2011, pg. 197). Perhaps more importantly, these reporting laws do not include all offenses committed on campus, for example simple larceny or theft, are left off of the list, despite that it has been shown that larceny and theft are the most commonly occurring crime on campus (Sloan and Fisher, 2011, pg. 197). Therefore what can be concluded is that researches do not know nearly enough and more work in this area is needed.
This was seen in Husseyn. The defendent was seen loitering near a van. The police approached and the defendent ran off. He was convicted of attempting to steal sub-aqua equipment, but this conviction was quashed as he was specificly looking to steal sub-aqua equipment. The only was to insure that the defendent is found guilty is by making sure that the indictment is drafted in a certain way. The law commission propose that the definition of attempt in the CAA should be amended so that an intent to commit an offence includes a conditional attempt to commit it. If this proposal is accepted then the gap in the law will be solved. This means that people who intended to commit a crime but the indictment for it is too specifc as seen in Husseyn will be found
... mens rea of the offence. The distinction laid down by this case between basic and specific intent crime is obscure and confusing and hence, the court often found them in dilemma in reaching their final judgment in particular case.
Now a days most carefully planned and designed software contains some defects. The Main aim of testing is to identify these defects. It also checks faults, errors, failures, and bugs in specific designed software. It requires creating and executing many tests. Software testing is the mensuration of software quality. The quality of the specific software can be achieved by the factors such as Correctness, Reliability and Testability.