SHORT ANSWERS COMPILATION Flashcards
What is the difference between Human Trafficking and Smuggling?
Smuggling involves a person who has freely consented to being brought into NZ as an Illegal Immigrant.
Trafficking involves a person who is brought into NZ by means of coercion and/or deception.
What is a document?
Document is defined in section 217 of the Crimes Act 1961. Document means a document, or part of a document, in any form; and includes, without limitation,— Paper or other material for writing or printing that can be read Photograph Negative Microfilm Disk Tape Etc
3 examples of a Legal Duty
Provide the necessaries and protect from injury.
Provide necessaries and protect from injury to your charges when you are a parent or guardian.
Provide necessaries as an employer.
Use reasonable knowledge and skill when performing dangerous acts, such as surgery.
Take precautions when in charge of dangerous things, such as machinery.
Avoid omissions that will endanger life.
R V RANGER - Pre Emptive Strike
R v Ranger (1988) 4 CRNZ 6
“If this defendant did really think that the lives of herself and her son were in peril because of the deceased, enraged after the struggle, might attempt to shoot them
with a rifle near at hand, then it would be going too far, we think, to say that thejury could not entertain a reasonable doubt as to whether a pre-emptive strike with
a knife would be reasonable force in all the circumstances.”
R V COTTLE
It is sufficient that the jury is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the defendant is insane; it does not need to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
S237(2) Provides a Statutory Defense for Blackmail
A belief by the person making the threat that they are entitled to the benefit or to cause to loss is not in it self a defense to a charge of blackmail unless in the circumstances the threat is, a reasonable and proper means for effecting his or her purpose.
Define Curtilage
The land immediately surrounding a house or dwelling, including any closely associated buildings and structures, but excluding any associated ‘open fields beyond’. It defines the boundary within which a home owner can have a reasonable expectation of privacy and where ‘common home activities’ take place.
Explain the Difference between Voluntary and Involuntary Manslaughter
Involuntary manslaughter there is no intention to kill. Unlawful killings caused by criminal negligence.
With voluntary manslaughter there is an intention to kill but the but due to mitigating circumstances such as a suicide pact the offence is reduced to manslaughter.
Define Suicide Pact
Suicide pact means a common agreement between 2 or more persons having for its object the death of all of them, whether or not each is to take his own life; but nothing done by a person who enters into a suicide pact shall be treated as done by him in pursuance of the pact unless it is done while he has the settled intention of dying in pursuance of the pact.
R v SKIVINGTON
Any defence for a charge of theft will also be a defence to a charge of robbery. Therefore the defence of claim of right is a defence to robbery.
R v Sturm
To “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. Thus, “stupefies” does not only describe a situation where a person is rendered senseless or unconscious but may also include circumstances where the administration of drugs has led to disinhibition and stimulated uncharacteristic behaviour.
Insane/sane automatism
Sane automatism the result of somnambulism (sleepwalking), a blow to the head or the effects of drugs.
Insane automatism the result of a mental disease.
R v Kelt
Having a firearm “with him” requires a very close physical link and a degree of immediate control over the weapon by the man alleged to have the firearm with him”.
S158 Homicide defined
Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly or indirectly, by any means whatsoever.
Define Culpable Homicide S160 (1) and (2)
160 Culpable homicide
(1) Homicide may be either culpable or not culpable.
(2) Homicide is culpable when it consists in the killing of any person—
(a) By an unlawful act; or
(b) By an omission without lawful excuse to perform or observe any legal duty; or
(c) By both combined; or
(d) By causing that person by threats or fear of violence, or by deception, to do an act which causes his death; or
(e) By wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person.
Define S162(2)
The period of a year and a day shall be reckoned inclusive of the day on which the last unlawful act contributing to the cause of death took place.
S163 Killing by influence on the mind
No one is criminally responsible for the killing of another by any influence on the mind alone, except by wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person, nor for the killing of another by any disorder or disease arising from such influence, except by wilfully frightening any such child as aforesaid or a sick person.
Not criminally responsible for killing of another by any influence on the mind alone except by willfully frightening:
A child under 16 years
A physical sick person
A mentally sick person
S165 Causing death that might have been prevented
Every one who by any act or omission causes the death of another person kills that person, although death from that cause might have been prevented by resorting to proper means.
Infanticide S178(1)
Where a woman causes the death of any child of hers under the age of 10 years in a manner that amounts to culpable homicide, and where at the time of the offence the balance of her mind was disturbed, by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to that or any other child, or by reason of the effect of lactation, or by reason of any disorder consequent upon childbirth or lactation, to such an extent that she should not be held fully responsible, she is guilty of infanticide, and not of murder or manslaughter, and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years.
R v Tomars
Formulates the issues in the following way:
- Was the deceased threatened by, in fear of or deceived by the defendant?
- If they were, did such threats, fear or deception cause the deceased to do the act that caused their death?
- Was the act a natural consequence of the actions of the defendant, in the sense that reasonable and responsible people in the defendant’s position at the time could reasonably have foreseen the consequences?
- Did these foreseeable actions of the victim contribute in a [significant] way to his death?
R v Horry
Death should be provable by such circumstances as render it morally certain and leave no ground for reasonable doubt – that the circumstantial evidence should be so cogent and compelling as to convince a jury that upon no rational hypothesis other than murder can the facts be accounted for.
Party – Section 66(1)
Everyone is party to and guilty of an offence who:
a) Actually commits the offence; or
b) Does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence; or
c) Abets any person in the commission of the offence; or
d) Incites, counsels or procures any person to commit the offence.
Party – Section 66(2)
Where 2 or more persons form a common intention to prosecute any unlawful purpose, and to assist each other therein, each of them is a party to every offence committed by any one of them in the prosecution of the common purpose if the commission of that offence was known to be a probable consequence of the prosecution of the common purpose.
S72 (1) Definition of attempts
Every one who, having an intent to commit an offence, does or omits an act for the purpose of accomplishing his object, is guilty of an attempt to commit the offence intended, whether in the circumstances it was possible to commit the offence or not.
R v STURM
Under section 191(1)(a) “it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the intended crime was actually subsequently committed”.
R v TIHI
In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a) (b) (c) “ it must be shown the offender either meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw that the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to risk of suffering it’.
