Evaluation questions focused 2022 Flashcards
Analyse and evaluate whether the law on murder should be reformed 25
A03
For (reform)
- Law on murder is unfair and is in need of reform due to its ongoing sentencing issues specifically with mandatory life sentences which is why the Law commission has proposed a tier system that splits murder in fairer chunks ie First degree murder which would have a mandatory life sentence
- Unfit for modern society due to its outdated nature this can be reinforced through its definition which was introduced by lord coke in 1613 as the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature under the queens peace with malice aforethought” since then there has been little attempt to reform apart from the for the Homicide Act 1957 . Furthermore lord cokes use of the word malice incites feelings of wickedness and anger which is not required for a murder charge ie R v Pretty suggesting that lord cokes definition not account for cases of murder out of love or compassion. aforethought suggests that planning/ premeditation which goes against the fundamental principe of men’s rea for such as serious offense concluding that lord cokes definition is inaccurate and misleading as well as falling to account for cases such as euthanasia. Has been described as The Law Commission (LC) has described the law of murder as a “rickety structure built on shaky foundations”,
- Against ( no reform)
-
Critically evaluate the concept of strict liability offences within the English legal system 25
For( strict liability within the English legal system)
- Raises standards. This is because the principle of strict liability is that mens rea is not necessary it be found guilty in offenses this means that strict liability raises standards of law specifically where health and safety of the public is at stake as this forces those in positions of responsibility to take extra precautions. Furthermore this can be seen in cases such as Callow v Tilstone regarding the sale of unfit meat , Pollution - Alphacell v Woodward and dangerous buildings - Gammon
- Promotes the enforcement of the law. This is because Strict liability ensures more convictions are secured and does not allow people to escape liability through a fabricated account of their state of mind because actus reus is sufficient. Furthermore other agencies of enforcement may be involved such as the Health and Safety Executive and Environmental Agencies which suggests that ..
- Easier to administer - The majority of strict liability offences are dealt with administratively often through the post without the need for a court hearing, which means that valuable court time is preserved because there is nothing to be proved. and prevents an overload of cases/ offences making it valuable offense in the english legal system
Against(
- Unfair - Promotes injustices and breaches article 6(2) the fundamental principle that everyone is innocent until proved guily. This is because A person may be liable where they are not at fault and have exercised all reasonable care. This offends the natural sense of justice as illustrated in the following cases: Callow v Tillstone - The butcher was liable despite doing everything possible to have the meat checked out.
R v Howells - The defendant was liable despite being unaware that he required a licence and had no intention to use the gun as a weapon.
Does not act as a deterrent -
Any criminal offence carries a stigma and needs to be declared for employment purposes. It can cause immense damage to a person’s or a business’ reputation and therefore proof of fault should always be a requirement in establishing criminal liability.
Explain the purpose of strict liability offense and the relevance of the gammon principles
Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of strict liability 25)
Intro-Strict liability crimes are not crimes which require no proof of mens rea. Strict liability offences are normally regulatory offences which are aimed at business in relation to health and safety or driving offences ie speeding etc
ADV
1. Raises standards and protects the public- this si because the necessary mens rea is not required this raises standards regarding to big business and ensures greater public protection as well as reinforcing the idea of true justice in the CJS. Evidence includes Callow v Tilstone where there was a sale of unfit meat and the D was help liable/ reinforced through the case of Alphacell v Woodward (pollution) and the case of Gammon ( unsafe buildings) - confirm why strict liability is necessary in the English legal system in order to protect the public and ensure high standards
- promote the enforcement of the law. strict liability ensures that convictions are secured and does not allow people to escape liability through there version of events. means that justice is reinforced and leads to people taking extra care and precautions because they know if they don’t that it can lead to a conviction
- easier to administer. -indictable offences can be heard with quickness, other agencies of enforcement such as the the Health and Safety Executive and Environmental Agencies which deal with strict liability offences. easier for liability to be inflicted
DISADV
1. Unfair-which acts as a disadvantage because it means that people are being held liable for things without proving that they had intention(mens rea) , this goes against the fundamental principle of the rule of law innocent till proven guilty thus creating a barrier towards true justice. reasonable care but is still liable that is an ineffective use of law. This can be illustrated in the previous case of Callow v Tillstone where although the D sold unfit meat he done everything necessary to have the meat checked out. This can be further shown in the case of R V Howells
- Strict liability offences fail to deter offenders -because a person must be aware of what they have done wrong in order for strict liability to act as a deterrent however in many circumstances the defendant is unaware of these circumstances ie in the case of PSGB V Storkwain. Link to speeding offences
- stigma that is held with some criminal offence and the lack of proof of fault increases this stigma and can cause damage to a person’s reputation or business.prevent an innocent person from being help to the same stigma as someone who may have committed an offence such as murder.
Loss of control is a limited defence to murder. Discuss 25)
Explain the differences between murder and voluntary manslaughter.
Intro- There are arguments to suggest that there are many differences between murder and manslaughter, one being the sentencing murder carries a harsher sentence where as manslaughter carries a lesser sentence. However critics suggest that the two defences are similar.
FOR( differences)
Point 1. Mandatory life sentences - Murder carries a mandatory life sentence this means that no matter what circumstances of the crime the judge has no choice but to implement a mandatory life sentence . There are no differentiations between a mercy killing from a premeditated killing. This differs from manslaughter because
Point 2. Defence of duress-
Point 3.
Against( similarities)
Point 1.
Point 2.
Point 3.
The Law Commission has previously said that the law of murder is in a mess. The law can be unclear, unfair, or too generous to killers. Juries have too few choices between verdicts to reflect how blameworthy the offender really was. This frequently leads to judges having an inadequate basis on which to sentence offenders. Victims’ families also rightly object to the excessive breadth of the different kinds of manslaughter, as compared with the single offence of murder.”
