Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Violence Offences > Short Answer > Flashcards

Short Answer Flashcards

1
Q

Test A = What is the Doctrine of transferred Malice?

Define R v Hunt case law?

A

It is not necessary that the person suffering the harm was the intended victim.
Mistaken ID or inflicted accidently on another = still criminality responsible.

R v Hunt
MATPCINEGMIS
Malice against the person cut is not essential, general malice is sufficient.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Definition of injurious substances and device?

2nd exam

A

CAROTCOCHTAP

Covers a range of things capable of causing harm to a person.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What was held in R v Skivington? Defence.

In 1st exam

A

Larceny [or theft] is an element of robbery and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right it is a defence to larceny. It then negatives one of the elements of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made out.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the three intents for kidnapping?

A

a. With intent to hold him or her for ransom or to service or (WITHHOHFRotS)
b. With intent to cause him or her to be confined or imprisoned or (WITCHOHTBCoI)
c. With intent to cause him or her to be sent or taken out of New Zealand. (WITCHOHTBSoTOONZ)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What questions must you ask when you receive information from a chis in relation to a robbery?

A
  1. Has the source supplied reliable info lately.
  2. Has the human source information come from two separate sources?
  3. Have staff who work where robbery took place seen any 1C person’s lately.
  4. Does the company deal with large amounts of money, drugs, valuable goods.
  5. Can you verify the information received as correct.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

When investigating a serious assault what circumstantial evidence can you use to prove intent?

A

PEUWNDBD

  1. Prior threats. PT
  2. Evidence of premeditation. EoP
  3. Use of a weapon. UoaW
  4. Whether any weapon used was opportunistic or purposely brought. WAWUwOoPB
  5. Number of blows. NoB
  6. Degree of force used. DoFU
  7. Body parts targeted by the offender (eg the head). BPTbO
  8. Degree of resistance or helplessness of the victim(eg unconscious). DoRoHotV.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Definition of R v Waters

A

A breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound.
The breaking of the skin will be normally evidenced by a flow of blood and, in its occurrence at the site of a blow or impact, the wound will more often than not be external.
But there are those cases where the bleeding which evidences the separation of tissues may be internal.
ABOTSWBCRAACOAW
TBOTSWBNEBAFOB A IIOATSOABOITWWMOTNBE
BTATCWTBWETSOTMBI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the statutory defence for blackmail?

ACALW TBIETB/CTL.
OV TIRAPMFBAOOCTL
JD.

A

R v Marshall
Accused can avoid liability where “they believe in entitlement to obtain benefit/cause the loss.
Objectively viewed, threat is reasonable and proper means for bringing about obtaining or causing the loss.
Jury decides.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Would a charge under 198A(1) fail if the Police officer was trespassing?

Y
POMBAITCOHOHDAMBALA.
TOPPWAINALA.

A

Yes.

Police officer must be acting in the course of his or her duty and must be a lawful act.
Trespassing on private property without authority is not a lawful act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Scenario - threatens neighbour “give the bash” unless gives/puts money in his letter box.
What offence committed and explain answer?

A
  1. Demands with intent to steal Sec239(1)
  2. Uses a threat of violence to compel another person to execute an act to obtain a benefit by way of a pecuniary advantage of which he has on claim of right too
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Explain Not limited to immediate harm for Sec188.
R v Mwai
Test A

Example of non immediate harmful consequence (HIV)
Test C

A

R v Mwai
The court of Appeal held that section 188 “is not limited to the immediate harmful consequences of the offenders actions”.
“All that is required for the actus reus is an act causing grievous bodily harm”.
The link between cause and effect is physical, not one of time.
The consequences may be delayed, but they are consequences nonetheless.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Test B = Ingredients for demanding with intent to steal?

WCOR
BFOWAT
Capt EMAE AoDaD coCaPA.
WITOAB

A
  1. Without claim of right.
  2. By force or with any threat.
  3. Compels any person to execute, make, accept, endorse, alter or destroy any document capable of conferring a pecuniary advantage.
  4. With intent to obtain any benefit.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Assault with intent to rob, Sec 236(1) or (2) CA1961. IMP14 yrs.

A

(1) . With intent to rob any person.
(a) . Causes GBH to that person or any other person or.
(b) . Being armed with any offensive weapon or instrument or anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument, assaults that person or any other person or.
(c) . Being together with another person or persons, assaults that person or any other person.

(2)
Everyone who assaults any person with intent to rob that person or any other person is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

intents of Black mail?

TCTPWTTIMTAIAWTWOTPMTT
A
TOABOTCLTTOP

A

To cause the person whom the threat is made to act in accordance with the will of the person making the threat and
To obtain any benefit or to cause loss to the other person.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

3 main investigative approach options for people trafficking and migrant smuggling?

  1. RI = VL, IBVATP
  2. PI= PL, COIIETP
  3. DI= WRTVDIR
A
  1. Reactive investigation = victim lead, initiated by victim approach to police.
  2. Proactive investigation = Police lead, commination of investigation, intel, evidence, then prosecution.
  3. Disruptive investigation = Where risk to victim demands immediate response.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Stupefies. Sec 191
R v Strum

CAEOTMONSOAPWSIWTPMPATAIAWWMHAIC
RSUAIAODHLTD

A

R v Strum.
Cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person which seriously interferes with that persons mental, physical ability to act, in a way which might hinder an intended crime.
Rendered senseless, unconscious and includes administration of drugs has lead to disinhibition.

17
Q

GBH not limited to immediate harm. R v Mwai.

A
  1. Putting people at risk through unprotected sex being infected with HIV.
  2. All that is required for the actus Reas to cause GBH. usually the effect is instant but not necessary. Delayed consequences still have an impact on victim.
18
Q

Explain R v Taisalika in relation to intoxication and intent.
In 1st exam.

TAUTHHBSIHCNRTI THCNHHTNI.
CHTLOMOPEINTSALOIATT.

A

Taisalika argued unsuccessfully that he had been so intoxicated he could not remember the incident, therefore he could not have had the necessary intent .
Court held that loss of memory of past events is not the same as lack of intent at the time.

19
Q

Doctrine of transferred malice.

Case law = R v Hunt.

A

It is not necessary that the person suffering the harm was the intended victim.
Mistaken ID or inflicted accidently on another = still criminality responsible.

MATPCINE GMIS
R v Hunt
Malice against the person cut is not essential, general malice is sufficient.

20
Q

Test C = Define GBH, Wound , Maims, Injures.

A 
GBH= DPP v Smith "bodily harm, needs no explanation and grievous means no less or no more than really serious.
Wound= R v Waters "Breaking of the skin evidenced by the flow of blood will most commonly be external, but can be internal.
Maims= Involves mutilating, crippling or disabling a part of the body so as to deprive the victim of the use of a limb or one of the senses.
Injures= R v Donovan "any hurt calculated to interferre with the health or comfort of the victim. It need not be permanent but must be more than trifling. To injure means to cause actual bodily harm.
21
Q

Ingredients for Demands with Intent to Steal.

Sec239(1) CA61.

A
  1. Without claim of right.
  2. By force or with any threat.
  3. Compels any person to execute, make, accept, endorse, alter or destroy.
  4. Any document capable of conferring a pecuniary advantage.
  5. With intent to obtain any benefit.
22
Q

What was held in R v Lapier?

Robbery

A

RICTITPITEIPBTTIM

Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken even if possession by the thief is momentary.

23
Q

The three intents of kidnapping?

A
  1. To hold him or her for service or ransom.
  2. To cause him or her to be confined or imprisoned.
  3. To cause him or her to be sent or taken out of NZ.
24
Q

Ingredients of using a firearm against a law enforcement officer. Sec198A(1) CA61

A
  1. Uses any firearm in any manner whatever.
  2. Against any constable or prison officer or traffic officer acting in the course of his or her duty.
  3. Knowing that or being reckless whether or not that person is a constable or traffic officer or prison officer so acting.
25
Q

What are the factors that increase the charge from a robbery to being aggravated?

A

a) Robs any person and at the time of or immediately before or immediately after the robbery causes GBH to any person.
OR
b) Being together with any other person robs any person.
OR
c) Being armed with an offensive weapon, instrument or anything appearing to be such a weapon or instrument robs any person.

26
Q

What must prosecution prove against someone who abducts a young person under Sec 210(2)?

A
  1. The accused received a person under age 16 AND
  2. The receiving was deliberate or intentional AND
  3. The accused knew that the young person had been unlawfully taken, enticed away or detained by another from a person who had lawful care, charge of him or her of possession of the young person AND
  4. The accused intended by reason of receiving to deprive the person with lawful care of possession of that young person.
27
Q

What was held in R v Joyce?

A

Must prove in committing the robbery the defendant was part of a joint enterprise by two or more people physically present at the time of the robbery.

28
Q

What was held in R v Taisalika in regards to necessary intent.

A

The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced on the complainants head would point strongly to the presents of the necessary intent.

29
Q

For claim of right there are 4 requirements for Nature of belief, what are they?

In 1st exam.

A
  1. 1st the belief must be a belief in a proprietary or possessory right in property.
  2. 2nd the belief must be about rights to the property in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed.
  3. 3rd the belief must be held at the time of the conduct alleged to constitute the offence.
  4. 4th the belief must be actually held by the defendant.
30
Q

What does Injure mean?

A

Defined in Sec2 CA61.
To injure means to cause actual bodily harm.
Actual bodily harm may be internal or external and it need not be permanent or dangerous.

R v Donovan = Includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim…need not be permanent, but must, no doubt, be more than merely transitory and trifling.

Violence Offences (4 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions