non fatal offences evalution

Question 1

non fatal offences evaluations (all critisms) (4)

Answer 1

Victorian act
language outdated
structures of offences
sentencing issues

Question 2

Victorian act development

Answer 2

not designed to cope with modern life (mental health/HIV/stalking) language and structure is an issue as its outdated. this is as diverse as poison and kidnapping making it confusing

Question 3

Victorian act of parliament example

Answer 3

r v ireland- man assaulted someone with out verbal or physical force e.g silent phone calls. this wouldn’t have been in this act as technology has advanced

Question 4

Victorian act of parliament extra

Answer 4

case law has helped the law to adapt to new situations so technically it has been dealt with

Question 5

language is outdated development (2 word examples)

Answer 5

'’assault’’, ‘‘common assault’’, ‘‘common assault and battery’’ all used interchangeably
‘‘wounding’’ used to describe minor breaks in the skin but this isn’t the general meaning of the word today

Question 6

language is outdated example (acts)

Answer 6

in s.47, 20, 18 offences against the person act these words are defined

Question 7

language is outdated extra (another word)

Answer 7

'’maliciously’’ is an outdated word we would use to describe a bad motive but Cunningham says it includes recklessness too

Question 8

structure of the offenses is inconsistent development

Answer 8

this doesn’t support the principle of fault- only punished for what is your fault. mens rea of the non fatal offences doesn’t match up to ds level of guilt- mens rea of assault and battery is the same as abh mens rea

Question 9

structure of the offenses is inconsistent example

Answer 9

r v mowatt
Did a charge under s. 18 require proving intent or recklessness regarding the injuries caused?

Question 10

structure of the offenses is inconsistent extra

Answer 10

it provides justice for victims where harm is worse than d foresaw

Question 11

sentencing issue development (your surname principle)

Answer 11

sentences dont conform to the ladder principle- more serious the offence, the more their sentence should increase at a proportional rate.
The bottom rung of the ladder corresponds to the least amount of supervision, while the top rung represents the most restrictive supervision.

Question 12

sentencing issue example

Answer 12

the gbh sentence is maximum 6 months in prison or up to a £5k fine yet gbh with intent maximum is life. jump is huge

Question 13

sentencing issue extra

Answer 13

judges can use discretion (the freedom to decide what should be done in a particular situation) to ensure punishment fits the crime