criminal law essay questions

criminal law essay questions

Criminal Law Essay Questions

1. Introduction

The chapter is structured so that it can be taught in a variety of ways – a straight lecture followed by class discussion, a question and answer format, or student use in a study group. I had a range of students in mind when I wrote this – not just the best and brightest – and whether it is used as an in-class teaching tool or a self-study aid, I hope it can demystify the principles of criminal law and make students comfortable analyzing fact patterns.

This chapter provides questions (and the answers to those questions) for a course in criminal law. They are designed to get students to apply their knowledge of the principles (derived from the cases and statutes) to the facts. The questions start with a short fact pattern, a terminal question, and then a series of sub-questions which are designed to ensure that students understand how to analyze the facts in the problem and how to apply the relevant legal principles. Teachers should encourage students to argue both sides of the case. In most instances, the “right” answer is not revealed in the material, which can be a helpful tool for both teachers and students.

2. Elements of Criminal Law

An act which is considered to be a crime is described as the actus reus, which is Latin for “guilty act”. An act becomes an actus reus when it is something which is prohibited by the criminal law. This may be because the law says we must not do a certain act or because it says that we must not fail to do a certain act. An example of the former would be the offence of Murder contrary to s. 1 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. This section provides that the accused is guilty of Murder if he “shall be convicted of murder if he shall unlawfully kill another.” This means that it is an offence to kill someone, unless that killing is specifically authorized by law (e.g. a soldier killing an enemy in time of war). An example of the latter would be the offence of failing to provide a breath or blood specimen for analysis in accordance with s.7 Road Traffic Act 1988. S.7(6) provides that “if a constable in uniform requires a person he believes to have been driving etc. a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or public place while under the influence of drink or drugs to provide a specimen of breath or of blood for analysis, it is an offence for that person to fail to provide the specimen”. This means that it is an offence not to do something which is being asked by a constable, namely providing a specimen of breath or blood.

A crime is considered to be an act which breaks the criminal law of a certain society. In our modern day legal system, a crime is defined as an offence against the state represented by the breach of a public law. It is necessary to distinguish between the general characteristics of criminal liability because all crimes differ. These differences are important for the purposes of ascertaining whether a crime has been committed, establishing guilt, proving innocence, and for the allocation and distribution of blame. Thus, in order to understand the general principles of criminal law, it is necessary to consider the nature of a crime and its general characteristics. It should be noted that despite there being certain basic elements which are common to most crimes, these elements will vary and the need to particularize or prove different things will vary from crime to crime.

3. Defenses in Criminal Law

Insanity has always been a significant defense in criminal law. According to the McNaughten rules, “Every man is presumed to be sane and to possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes, until the contrary is proved.” This defense has been a highly criticized area in law. The special defense of diminished responsibility, which was brought in to replace the old defense of “irresistible impulse,” has not been greatly different, and there has been no great watering down of this area in law.

The accused gets an opportunity to legally defend himself against the allegations put on him. It is usually up to the prosecution to destroy any defense. That is, it’s up to criminal law to keep the burden of proof. However, if all the accused has to establish is a balance of probabilities, the burden will, in reality, shift to him. An example of this in general law is duress.

4. Criminal Law and Society

Sociological jurisprudence has been influential in shaping the law and its policies. In its simplest sense, it is the study of the law and legal institutions using the methods of social science. One might ask why we should concern ourselves with policy reasons. A clear understanding of the intended purpose of criminal law provides guidance when applying the law to particular cases and is essential to ensuring just outcomes are reached. For instance, the express statutory defense for self-defense in s.418 of the Queensland Criminal Code provides guidance on when force used to defend oneself is allowed, and Harper and Ireland provide further guidance in a circumstance involving domestic violence. Self-defense as a concept is essential in protecting individual liberty, and it is vital that its legal parameters be clearly outlined. An understanding of the policy aims of this provision would assist student learning to apply the law. An understanding of the intended purpose of a law also enables an evaluation of how successful the law has been and if it needs to be reformed.

It is during times of change and uncertainty that society chooses to penalize, prohibit, and criminalize particular behaviors and acts. Over recent decades, this has become very evident with the increased criminalization of, for example, certain types of drug use and the ever-increasing list of traffic offenses, which were previously dealt with under civil law. At this time, scholars became interested in the impact of criminal law on social change and its role as a tool for setting standards of behavior. This area of interest is now often described as the sociology of criminal law. It is a critical area of study for students as it provides deeper insights into the policy reasons behind the development of the criminal law and allows for critical debates to occur.

5. Conclusion

The law states that a person will not be held responsible for criminal conduct that he/she took under the compulsion of threats. Two steps are involved in establishing a defense of duress by threat. First, the defendant must be impelled to act as he did because he reasonably believed that he or a member of his immediate family was presented with a threat of death or serious personal injury. The question is whether the defendant’s belief was reasonable. If the threat was originally made to the defendant, it must be of death or serious personal injury which is the only threat recognized. If the threat was directed at a third party, the defendant must have reasonably believed that this third party was under the same compulsion which gave rise to his own threat and he was impelled to act through a desire to help that person. It must be clear to the jury on the balance of probabilities, taking the defendant as he was at the time of the alleged offense that the reason or the principal reason of his acting as he did was a result of the threats. If the defendant’s will was overborne by the threats so that he did what he otherwise would not have done, or if he lost the choice to resist the threats effectively, then it can be said that the threats were an impelling cause and the judge should leave the issue before the jury.