EVALUATION PAPER 2 POINTS

Question 1

Evaluate actus reus

Answer 1

• Should ordinary people be considered rescuers and not authority
• “The intervening act must be sufficiently dependant of the offenders conduct and serious.”
• should offenders be liable for their medical conditions ( R v Cheshire)

Question 2

Evaluate mens rea

Answer 2

• Recklessness is a subjective test as they are only guilty if the foresaw their risks
• difficult for jurors to understand the law
• the law does not give protection to innocent members of the public from subjective tests
• Hard to balance public protection and fairness to the defendant
• prosecution has to prove that the offender realised their risks and this can be difficult to explain to jurors.

Question 3

Evaluate appropriation s3

Answer 3

• Can it be a continuing act or happen at a fixed time ( R v Vinall)
• Being able to appropriate even when the owner has consented - the problem with gifts in civil law ( R v Hinks)
• Innocent appropriation vs Theft appropriation when looking at dishonesty
• The clash between fraud and theft (R v Barton and Booth)

Question 4

Evaluate Dishonesty s2

Answer 4

• The effect of the new criminal law test for dishonesty in Barton and Booth’s case, giving a wider scope of conviction
• Dishonesty does not have a clear definition in the act
  Behaviour that isn’t considered dishonest is:
• they’ve gained consent
• They have the right to that property
• the owner cannot be found

Question 5

Evaluate intention to permanently deprive s6

Answer 5

• intention to permanently deprive alone cannot amount to theft,
• if someone dishonestly as well as appropriates an item however does not intend to permanently deprive them, should they be guilty ( R v Lloyd)
• conditions intention is not enough to convict a person ( R v Easom)
• The act should replace “permanent deprivation” with “temporary” . this is a strength as it considers conditional intent in burglary as well.

Question 6

Evaluate the law on Robbery s8

Answer 6

• Appropriation could occur at one point in time or can be a continuing act. ( R v Lockley)
• The administration of force can occur after the theft ( R v Lockley) or before the theft ( R v Hale)
• Levels of force should be interpreted by the jury
• problems can occur when the force administered was minimal ( R v Dawson and James
• because force must facilitate the theft, what about when the force is accidental

Question 7

Evaluate the law on Burglary s9

Answer 7

• Does the law primarily protect the people or the property more. This is because proving the intention to damage (even slight)
• proving 9(1)(b) is easier that proving 9(1)(a)
• there is no definition of; entry, trespasser, part of a building
• a person can become a trespasser when they go beyond the permission given to them ( R v Jones and smith) `

Question 8

Evaluate the law on Blackmail s21

Answer 8

• can be difficult to prove an implied demand
• A demand will have been made even if the victim was not aware of it Treacy v DPP (continuous demand)
• The person making the demand does not have to be the same person making the menaces
• proving that the demand needed menaces is difficult or whether they are entitled to the property.
• a person being blackmailed may feel terrified to speak up

Question 9

Evaluate the law on handling stolen goods s22

Answer 9

• MUST prove that the offender was aware of the goods being stolen and this may be hard to prove by the prosecution
• the jury should question if the defendant knew for certain that the goods are stolen
• evidence of them handling the stolen goods can be enough evidence to prove that they KNEW the goods were stolen and this can be unfair to the accused
• this offence is closely linked to other offences in the act

Question 10

Evaluate the law on making off without payment s3

Answer 10

• Difficult to distinguish between making off without payment and delayed payment ( R v Allen)
• there may be instances where payment is not required on the spot and cannot be an offence of making off without payment however could fall under the fraud act
• there remains an issue with taxi drivers and the duties that exist between them and the passenger.

Question 11

Evaluate the law on criminal damage s1

Answer 11

• definition of ‘destroy’ and ‘damage’ is vague
• recklessness is a subjective test
• defendants should be only guilty if they realise the risks.
• Would it matter if the defendant did not see their risks and the consequence was small or severe.

Question 12

Evaluate the law on Fraud

Answer 12

• Fraud can overlap with theft Barton & booth
• could the act be criminalising lying
• terms used in the act are complex and not fully defined
• a representation can be considered false if it is misleading and is more widespread. There’s no need to prove a gain or loss
• for obtaining services dishonestly, a gain and loss has to be proved.