MULTICHOICE - MOCK 1 Flashcards
Aggravated Wounding is an offence under section 191 of the Crimes Act 1961. Under the provisions of this section an offender can “stupefy” a person.
Which statement best describes the term “stupefy”?
a) Stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system, or any other psychological aspect or orientation of a person, which could interfere with that person’s mental or physical ability to act in any way which might hinder any crime.
b) Stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person, which can marginally interfere with that person’s mental or physical ability to act in any way which will enable them to hinder an intended crime.
c) Stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person, which really seriously interferes with that person’s mental or physical ability to act in any way which might hinder an intended crime.
c) Stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person, which really seriously interferes with that person’s mental or physical ability to act in any way which might hinder an intended crime.
Section 188 and 189 of Crimes Act 1961 both address offenders’ intent and victim’s outcome in relation to serious assaults.
What is the key difference between the two sections?
a) the outcome or injury to the victim
b) intent of the offender
c) section 188 does not have a “reckless” component
a) the outcome or injury to the victim
Migrant smuggling is found in Section 98C of the Crimes Act 1961. This offence differs from the offences highlighted in the people trafficking provisions found in section 98D of the Crimes Act 1961.
Which statement best describes migrant smuggling?
a) a person who is to be exploited in the destination country
b) a person who has freely consented and is not subjected to coercion and/or deception.
c) a person who has been subjected to coercion and/or deception
b) a person who has freely consented and is not subjected to coercion and/or deception.
Under section 188 of the Crimes Act 1961, subsections (1) and (2) both relate to actions that result in wounding, maiming, disfiguring or grievous bodily harm to a victim.
In relation to intent and outcomes of subsections (1) and (2) which statement is most correct?
a) the offender’s intent is the same, the distinction between the two sections is the outcome.
b) the outcome is the same, the distinction between the two sections is the offender’s intent.
c) the penalty and outcome are the same, the distinction between the two sections is the offender’s intent.
b) the outcome is the same, the distinction between the two sections is the offender’s intent.
Section 198B of the Crimes Act 1961 relates to the commission of an imprisonable offence with a firearm. One of the key elements is that the offender “has a firearm with him”.
Which statement best describes the term “has firearm with him”?
a) The persons involved have complete control of a firearm with the required intent although they may not have actual possession of it.
b) The person involved must have possession of the firearm although it need not be under their immediate control.
c) Having a firearm with him requires a very close physical link and degree of immediate control over the firearm
c) Having a firearm with him requires a very close physical link and degree of immediate control over the firearm
“Circumstantial Evidence” can be used to infer an offender’s intent in relation to serious assaults. This evidence can be divided into 3 broad areas, two of which are: the act itself and the surrounding circumstances.
What is the third area?
a) the offenders’ actions and words during the assault.
b) the injury received by the victim.
c) the statement of the victim.
a) the offenders’ actions and words during the assault.
One of the acts in Aggravated Wounding includes to “render someone incapable of resistance by violent means”.
Which of the following statements correctly reflects the threat that is required for “renders someone incapable of resistance”?
a) There must be combination of threats and physical violence to constitute violent means at the time.
b) A mere threat may in itself be sufficient to constitute violent means dependent on the circumstances.
c) A mere threat may not in itself be sufficient to constitute violent means dependant on the circumstances.
b) A mere threat may in itself be sufficient to constitute violent means dependent on the circumstances.
To successfully establish a charge involving “disfigurement” under section 188(2) of the Crimes Act 1961, you have to prove the outcome and the intent.
What outcome and intent is required to be proved for section for section 188(2)?
a) in addition to causing disfigurement, had an intention to cause grievous bodily harm to the person or had reckless disregard for the safety of others.
b) in addition to causing disfigurement, had an intention to injure the person or had reckless disregard for safety of others.
c) had an intention to cause permanent injury or damage to the person or acted with reckless disregard for their safety.
b) in addition to causing disfigurement, had an intention to injure the person or had reckless disregard for safety of others.
Section 198 of the Crimes Act 1961 outlines the offence of discharging a firearm of doing a dangerous act with intent to grievous bodily harm. A person can be liable if they have the specified intent when they do one of three acts.
Which of these is an act specified in the section?
a) Stupefies a person
b) Seriously assaults a person
c) Sends an explosive device to a person
c) Sends an explosive device to a person
Injuring with intent is an offence specified under section 189 of the Crimes Act 1961. Subsections (1) and (2) specify different intents although the outcomes are the same.
Which of the following statements is true in relation to subsection (1)?
a) there is an allowance for recklessness under subsection (1)
b) there is no allowance for recklessness under subsection (1)
c) to injure is the requisite intent of subsection (1)
b) there is no allowance for recklessness under subsection (1)
You receive a complaint where an offender commits a robbery with a finger up a jersey pretending that it is a gun. Section 235(c) of the Crimes Act 1961 identifies the use of an offensive weapon or instrument or anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument during a robbery.
Identify which statement is true in relation to instrument and anything appearing to be such an instrument.
a) A firearm pursuant to the Arms Act 1983
b) An offensive weapon as defined in Section 202A - Crimes Act 1961
c) An instrument is not defined by statute
c) An instrument is not defined by statute
Migrant Smuggling and People Trafficking are two distinct offences found in the Crimes Act 1961.
What is the key distinction between the two offences?
a) Migrant Smuggling involves a person who has freely consented to be brought into NZ and People Trafficking involves a person who has been brought to NZ by means of coercion or deception
b) People trafficking involves a person who has freely consented to be brought into NZ and Migrant Smuggling involves a person who has been brought to NZ by means of coercion or deception.
c) People Trafficking relates to trafficking people for prostitution and Migrant Smuggling is to smuggle people for money.
a) Migrant Smuggling involves a person who has freely consented to be brought into NZ and People Trafficking involves a person who has been brought to NZ by means of coercion or deception
Alice is a girl aged 15 years old. Her parents are separated, and she lives with her mother who has recently obtained legal custody of her. Following an argument with her mother, Alice telephones her father and asks him to come and pick her up and states that she wants to live with him. The mother has left the house, and the father agrees because he is annoyed that his wife won custody of Alice. He picks Alice up and takes her back to his house. This is the third time this has happened and has been warned to stop uplifting his daughter from her home address.
The Police arrive the morning and the father tells them that he intended to return Alice after a couple days.
What is the father’s potential liability?
a) He has not abducted Alice because it was her idea to stay with him and therefore, he has no liability.
b) He has abducted Alice because he intended to deprive the mother of possession of her.
c) He has not abducted Alice because he had no intention to deprive the mother permanently of Alice.
b) He has abducted Alice because he intended to deprive the mother of possession of her.
Janice is 17 years of age and is a bully at the local high school. She pushes a younger pupil against the wall and threatens to “break her face” if she does not hand over her lunch money. The girl tells Janice that she has no money but will bring the money the following day and give it to her at lunch. Janice lets her go. The next day at lunch, the girls her lunch money, $10 to Janice.
What should Janice be charged with?
a) Demands with intent to steal, Section 239 Crimes Act 1961
b) Theft, Section 219 - Crimes Act 1961
c) Robbery, Section 234(1) - Crimes Act 1961
c) Robbery, Section 234(1) - Crimes Act 1961
A statutory defence for blackmail is found in Section 237(2) of the Crimes Act 1961.
Which statement best describes that statutory defence?
a) A belief by the person making the threat that they are entitled to the benefit or to cause the loss is not in itself a defence to charge under Section 237(1), unless the threat is, in the circumstances, a reasonable and proper means for effecting his/her purpose.
b) A belief by the person making threat that they are entitled to the benefit or to cause the loss is not in itself a defence to a charge under Section 237(1) unless the threat is, in the circumstances, is made to effect his/her purpose.
c) A belief by the person making the threat that they are entitled to the benefit or to cause the loss is itself a defence to a charge under Section 237(1) as the threat is a reasonable and proper means for effecting his/her purpose.
a) A belief by the person making the threat that they are entitled to the benefit or to cause the loss is not in itself a defence to charge under Section 237(1), unless the threat is, in the circumstances, a reasonable and proper means for effecting his/her purpose.
