Diagnostic test

Chapter 1. Which one is correct? The study of the criminal law is a study of:

Liability, that is, matters of guilt and innocence.

Sentence, that is, how long the offender can be sent to prison.

Proof, that is, how the defendant's guilt can be proved.

Truth, that is, what actually happened and how justice can be served.

Chapter 1. On most criminal law modules, the only two defences which the defendant has to prove are…?

Self-defence and mistake

Self-defence and diminished responsibility

Diminished responsibility and insanity

Insanity and mistake

Chapter 2. Which of the following is a result crime?

Fraud

Theft

Murder

Robbery

Chapter 2. The essence of the House of Lords' decision in Kennedy [2008] is:

Where the victim's act is unreasonable, unforeseeable or daft, it breaks the chain of causation.

A victim's refusal of medical treatment on medical grounds is always unreasonable.

Where the victim is a fully informed and responsible adult, and freely and voluntarily self-administers drugs supplied by D, D has not caused the victim's death.

Where the victim is a fully informed and responsible adult, and freely and voluntarily self-administers drugs supplied by D, D has caused the victim's death.

Chapter 3. Which of the following types of mens rea is NOT assessed subjectively?

Intention

Recklessness

Wilfully

Negligence

Chapter 3. If foresight of a virtual certainty is evidence of intention, which of the following statements is false?

The jury must reach its decision on all the facts.

The jury may find D foresaw the result as a virtual certainty but may nevertheless find he did not intend the result.

The jury must first decide whether D foresaw the result as a virtual certainty before considering whether D intended the result.

The jury has to convict D if they find he foresaw the result as a virtual certainty.

Chapter 4. Which of the following is the most accurate description of strict liability?

All offences at common law.

Where the statutory definition does not expressly state any mens rea.

Where there is no mens rea for any element of the actus reus in the offence.

Where an element of actus reus does not have any mens rea.

Chapter 4. Which of the following is not a consideration when deciding if an offence is one of strict liability?

The presumption of mens rea.

The deterrent effect making the offence one of strict liability would have.

Whether the offence is truly criminal or regulatory.

Whether D could be said to have caused the consequence or not.

Chapter 5.Which of the following is NOT an acceptable use of the word 'assault' in its broadest sense?

A technical assault which involves causing V to apprehend immediate force.

V suffers psychological harm.

As a collective noun encompassing the separate crimes of technical assault or battery.

A common assault.

Chapter 5.Which of the following is FALSE in respect of a technical assault?

The mensrea is intention or recklessness to cause some harm.

Words alone may amount to a technical assault.

The actusreus of a technical assault may be satisfied where V expects to be hit now, but he is not afraid.

Silence may amount to an assault.

Chapter 6. Which of the following is the definition of consent in s. 74 SOA 2003?

A person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the intelligence to make that choice.

A person consents if he agrees by choice, and is sufficiently sober to make an informed decision.

A person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice.

A person consents if he agrees by choice, and he is of the age to make that choice.

Chapter 6. Which of the following is the best description of the offence contrary to s. 1 SOA 2003?

D penetrates with his penis the vagina, anus, or mouth of V and V does not consent.

D intentionally penetrates with his penis the vagina, anus, or mouth of V, V does not consent and D does not believe that V consents.

D has unlawful sexual intercourse with V, V does not consent and D does not reasonably believe that V consents.

D intentionally penetrates with his penis the vagina, anus, or mouth of V, V does not consent and D does not reasonably believe that V consents.

Chapter 7. Which of the following amount to a qualifying trigger?

Any racial insult

Anything said or done

Fear of serious violence

Provocative words or deeds

Chapter 7. Which of the following characteristics ARE admissible by s. 54 (1)(c) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?

D's age and sex.

Any characteristic of D which is one of normal tolerance and self-restraint.

Any characteristic of D which affects his general level of self-control.

(a) and (b) only.

Chapter 8. Which of the following is NOT an element of the offence of unlawful act manslaughter?

Foresight of death.

D's deliberate act causes V's death.

D's deliberate act is dangerous.

D's deliberate act is a criminal offence.

Chapter 8. Which case is the leading authority for the offence of gross negligence manslaughter?

Newbury and Jones (1977)

Adomako (1995)

Church (1966)

Lidar (2000)

Chapter 9. Which of the following is FALSE?

A person can be convicted of encouraging and assisting an offence if the full offence is impossible.

A person can be convicted of conspiracy to commit an offence if the full offence is impossible.

A person can be convicted of attempting an offence if the full offence is impossible.

A person cannot be convicted of any inchoate offence if the full offence is impossible.

Chapter 9. In which of the following cases did the jury find D had done an act which was more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence?

Jones (1990)

Gullefer (1990)

Geddes (1996)

Campbell (1991)

Chapter 10. In Thornton v Mitchell (1940) why was the accessory not guilty of aiding and abetting?

Because P has a defence.

Because P had not committed the offence.

Because P was liable for another offence.

Because P was simply an innocent agent.

Chapter 10. Which of the following is TRUE?

In Becerra (1975), running off and shouting "let's go" were sufficient to constitute a withdrawal from the joint venture.

In Rook (1993) not turning up as planned was a sufficient withdrawal.

Withdrawal from a spontaneous joint venture is no different from withdrawal from a planned joint venture.

In Becerra (1975), running off and shouting "let's go" were not insufficient to constitute a withdrawal from the joint venture.

Chapter 11. Which of the following statements is the most accurate description of appropriation?

The assumption by D of all of the rights of the owner.

The assumption by D of more than one of the rights of the owner.

The assumption by D of one of the rights of the owner.

The assumption by D of any of the rights of the owner without consent.

Chapter 11. Which of the following is NOT a situation in s. 2 Theft Act 1968?

if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it.

if he appropriates the property in the belief that he would have the other's consent if the other knew.

if he appropriates the property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps.

If he appropriates the property in the belief that the reasonable person would regard his appropriation as honest.

Chapter 12. In Harris (1975), D was convicted of attempting to obtain a pecuniary advantage by deception when he checked into a hotel under a false name. Which offence, if any, is it likely he could be convicted of under the Fraud Act 2006?

None

Section 1 by breach of s. 2

Section 1 by breach of s. 3

Section 1 by breach of s. 4

Chapter 12. What offence is governed by s. 11 of the Fraud Act 2006?

Dishonestly obtaining services by deception.

Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

Dishonestly obtaining services.

Dishonestly appropriating services.

Chapter 13. Which of the following is NOT an element of the actus reus of criminal damage under s. 1(1) Criminal Damage Act 1971?

Destroys or damages.

Any property belonging to another.

Without lawful excuse.

Intending or being reckless as to the damage or destruction.

Chapter 13. Many of the terms in the offence of basic criminal damage are replicated in the aggravated crime in s. 1(2) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971. Which one below is NOT?

Destroys or damages

Intending to destroy or damage

Property

Belonging to another

Chapter 14. Insanity and automatism (that is insane automatism and non-insane automatism) are similar defences. In which way, from those listed, do they differ?

D must have had a defect of reason.

The defect of reason must have been caused by a disease of mind.

D did not form mens rea.

D did not know what he was doing.

Chapter 14. In order to determine the effect of the defence of (non-insane) automatism, further questions need to be answered. Select the option below which is NOT a further consideration.

Whether the offence is specific intent

Whether the offence is basic intent

If the offence is basic intent, whether D was Bailey reckless in becoming an automaton

Whether D formed mens rea

Chapter 15. Which of the following is FALSE?

The defences (both at common law and under the Criminal Law Act 1967) operate the same rules.

In most self-defence situations, D will be able to rely on either defence.

Where D makes a mistake about the need to use force, his only defence is the common law defence.

Where D makes a mistake about the need to use force, his only defence is under the Criminal Law Act 1967 s. 3.

Chapter 15. Which of the following is FALSE?

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove D did not actually feel compelled to commit the crime.

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove D was not threatened with death or serious injury or the situation would not cause death or serious injury.

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove D was not threatened with death or serious injury either to himself, a member of his immediate family, or to person for whose safety D would reasonably regard himself as responsible.

The defence of duress fails if the prosecution can prove the person of reasonable firmness would have done the same as D.

Herring, Criminal Law Concentrate 7e Student Resources

Quiz Content