Discuss the potential criminal liabilities that arise in BOTH the following scenarios:

The following are a mixture of problem and essay questions, I need about 1000 words on each please. The requirements are of a first class standard. Therefore, referring to the correct legislation and referencing as much case law as possible are a must. The answers need to flow accordingly and answer the core concepts of each respective question. No referencing required, its not coursework, these are to be answered as if they were being done in an exam setting.

1)Peter is a member of a small environmental pressure group that believes passionately in the need to take direct action to stop cruelty to animals. He places a bomb on a boat in order to prevent it sailing out to kill baby seals. He believes the boat to be empty, and he hides on the quay to prevent anyone from going on board. Cecil, a member of the crew, approaches and Peter jumps on him, bringing him to the ground and breaking his leg. At that moment the bomb explodes, killing Saphire, an engineer who was on board carrying out repairs. Discuss Peters criminal liability.

2)Annabel and Derek have been married for 12 years. Derek controls every aspect of Annabels life and sometimes is physically violent towards her. Annabel is very scared of him. This situation has been going on for about 6 years. Annabel has lots of friends and they all tell her to leave Derek and have invited her to stay with them, or suggested that she goes to a hostel for battered women. Annabel says that she loves Derek and hopes that he will change.

One evening Derek complains about the dinner that Annabel has made for him and throws it on the floor. He then storms out of the room and says he is going to bed.

Discuss the potential criminal liabilities that arise in BOTH the following scenarios:

a) Annabel waits until he is asleep, and then, slowly and as quietly as possible, walks into the bedroom with a large kitchen knife and kills Derek.
b) Annabel waits until he is asleep and then takes an overdose of pills and kills herself.

3) Margaret is a single mother who has two children, Sophie aged 2 and Molly aged 7.

The last few months have been very difficult for Margaret for a number of reasons.

As a result she is depressed and very stressed. One evening after a very tiring day Margaret loses her temper with her children. Sophie has been crying and screaming for 3 hours and Molly, who has a behaviour problem, is running around the flat breaking things. Margaret hits Molly on the head four times with her hand and picks up Sophie and shakes her very hard. When she notices that Sophie appears to have stopped breathing she calls an ambulance. The ambulance arrives two hours later and one of the nurses accidentally knocks Sophies head against a wall. In the hospital the Doctor fails to notice the seriousness of the injury to the head and as a result Sophie suffers long term brain damage. Discuss the potential criminal liabilities of Margaret, the Nurse and the Doctor.

4)Recklessness remains a difficult concept to explain to juries. This is primarily because the level of foreseeability required to be present for conviction for an offence cannot be easily identified. Critically discuss.

5) To what extent can and should corporations be held criminally liable for manslaughter?

6) After Woollin 1999 1 AC 82 ( HL) all the difficulties with proving intention have been solved. Discuss with reference to the offence of murder. Has it really resolved the issue of oblique intention whereby defendants will not be convicted of murder if death or grievous bodily harm was not the desired consequence of their actions? Does the doctrine of Intention really attribute responsibility to perpetrators of crimes in a fair manner?

7) Tony decides to kill his wife, Sarah, who is having an affair. He buys a knife and a bottle of vodka. He drinks the vodka and returns home to find his wife's friend, Claire, waiting to talk to him. Tony loses his temper as soon as Claire begins telling him that Sarah has moved out to go and live with her. He takes out the knife and stabs Claire, killing her.

Evaluate the accuracy of each of the four statements A, B, C, and D individually, as they apply to the facts in the above scenario. Statement A: Tony cannot be charged with murder because he was only planning to kill Sarah, not Claire. Statement B: Tony will be successful in reducing a potential conviction from murder to manslaughter by pleading intoxication as a defence. Statement C: Tony cannot plead provocation as a defence because he did not react immediately when he first saw Claire. Statement D: Tony will not be successful in reducing a potential conviction from murder to manslaughter because there is no evidence of deliberate provocation by Claire.

8) Identify the extent to which the defence of necessity is recognised by the criminal law and explain the reasons for its limited recognition.

9) Billy is sexually attracted to his neighbour, Mia, whom he (incorrectly) believes to share his feelings. One evening he invites Mia over to his house for a drink. After Mia has entered the house, Billy locks the front door and puts the key in his pocket. There have been several burglaries in the area and Billy always does this for security.

Billy pours Mia a drink and secretly slips into it a drug, which normally has the effect of loosening inhibitions. However, the drug has a different effect on Mia making her dizzy and physically weak. Billy starts making sexual advances towards Mia. Mia is afraid that Billy will physically harm her if she does not submit. She also thinks she cannot escape because she saw Billy lock the door. As a result she submits to intercourse with Billy. Billy believes that Mia is consenting to sexual intercourse, and that the drug has merely loosened Mias inhibitions. After the intercourse Mia goes home.

Discuss Billys potential criminal liability.

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get a Discount!

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get a Discount!