‘THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES | Semester! LY semester it C1 supplementavSummer Seroot SE | Examinations of December (TapriVMay_C] July (@%2012 ee % —— staugustine C | Mode oncampus 2 ayDistance poor Course Code and Tile: LAW'1110 CRIMINAL LAW! Date: Friday, December 7, 2012 Time: 9:00-11:00 a.m. Duration: 2 Hours. Paper No: Materials required: Answer booklet: Normal C1 speciat CO Notrequirea Cl Calculator: Programmable C] Non Programmable CI (where applicable) ‘Multiple Choice answer sheets: numerical CI. alphabetical D120 O 1400 0 Auxiiary/Other material(s) - Please specify: Candidates are permitted to bring the following items to their desks: Pencil or pen, Ruler, 1D card, Exam card. Answer THREE (3) questions. Answers may be confined to the law of any jurisdiction In the Commonwealth Caribbean unless the context indicates otherwise. Instructions to Candidates: This paperhas_4 pages & 6 __questions. ‘Candidates are reminded that the examiners shall take into account the proper use of the English Language in determining the mark for each response. 1. Answer EITHER (a) OR (6) (a) “Unless a deliberate attempt is to be made by society, acting through the agency of the law, to ‘equate the sphere of crime with that of sin, there must remain a realm of private morality and immorality which is, in brief and crude terms, not the law's business.” Critically discuss whether you agree. OR (b) Analyse the nales applicable to insanity and automatism. SEMESTER 1 2012/2013Andre, Baron, Carla and Dereen are playing dominoes in Andre’s third floor apartment. A quarrel breaks out and Andre begins screaming, yelling and pelting dominoes at Dereen. In a panic, Carla who was once in an abusive relationship with Andre, becomes frightened and jumps out of the closest window. Baron calls for emergency assistance. Dereen, who is blinded by dominoes that hit her in the eyes, stumbles out of the apartment, trips and falls down three flights of stairs. By the time emergency medical assistance arrives on the scene, Dereen has lost consciousness. The emergency medical team rushes Andre, Carla and Dereen to the hospital. After her eyes and bruises were treated, Dereen is sent home but the hospital doctor fails to diagnose that Carla suffered internal injuries from falling down the stairs, Dereen dies from her internal injuries Carla's injuries are clearly more serious. Carla is told that she must remain in bed af the hospital for two weeks to allow her wounds to heal. Two days later Carla, frustrated from being inactive, leaves her bed, puts on her clothes and checks out of the hospital. Her wounds burst open and she bleeds to death. AL tnal, Andre argues that he is not responsible for Carla or Dereen’s death, Write a legal memorandum discussing Andre’s liability. 3. Answer BOTH (a) AND (b) (a) In Moloney [1985] 1 All ER 1025 at 1036, Lord Bridge says, “I am firmly of the opinion that foresight of consequences, as an issue bearing on the issue of intention in ‘murder. ..belongs not to the substantive law but to the law of evidence.” With reference to relevant case law, discuss the extent to which Lord Bridge is correct in his assertion and the extent to which his view is reflected in the current state of the law (16.65 Marks). AND. (b) With the decision in Rv G, recklessness has now been placed in its proper legal perspective. Critically discuss whether you agree (16.65 Marks). 4, Bartrinjam is a Commonwealth Caribbean country. Section 7(7) of the Firearms Act of 1962 of Bartrinjam (hereinafter the “Act”) provides that: “Subject to any exemption under this Act, itis an offence for a person to have in his or her possession, or to purchase or acquire, a firearm without holding a firearm certificate in force at the time.”s. Section 23(1) of the Act provides that: “Nothing in this Act relating to Firearms shall apply to an antique firearm which is sold, transferred, purchased, acquired or possessed as a curiosity or ornament.” Jodie, a history student in her final year of university, calls the police when she hears a suspicious sound outside her dorm room window. When the police come to Jodie’s dorm room to investigate, the police notice a long gun resting on her bookease, When asked for her firearm certificate, Jodie says, “A firearm certificate, for what? This is one of the original 18" century muskets that Nanny used when she led the Maroons.” Jodie is arrested. At trial, Jodie’s defence attorney argued that the firearm was an antique within the meaning of Section 23(1) of the Act, and even if the firearm was a fake, Jodie-Ann reasonably and honestly believed the gun to be an antique firearm and should therefore be absolved from all liability During the trial, a firearms expert testified that the gun was a modern reproduction of a type that existed in 1729 but that it was in fact manufactured in China in 1976. ‘The trial judge directed the jury to convict Jodie if they found that the firearm was not an antique. Jodie appealed to the Court of Appeal on the grounds that the judge misdirected the jury by not allowing the jury to consider her honest and reasonable mistake. ‘You are a clerk to the Court of Appeal and are asked to write a legal memorandum explaining the relevant points of law. ‘After their favorite team loses a Twenty20 ericket match, Ashley and Cecile purchase cricket bats from a vendor om the grounds. As they are making their purchase, Ashley and Cecile tel the vendor that they are so mad at the star batsman for making zero runs that they are going to give him one good knock to the head. Along with a group of angry cricket fans, Ashley and Cecile storm the pitch and attack the star batsman with their newly purchased cricket bats while others attack him with wicket stumps. The star batsman dies from a knife wound in his back. Seeing his lifeless body, Ashley and Cecile get scared and ask George to take them home. George, although not involved, stood by and watched the entire incident. George agrees and takes Ashley and Cecile home. Ashley, Cecile and George are stopped and arrested. After hearing the entire story, the vendor who sold Ashley and Cecile the cricket bats is also arrested, Ashley, Cecile, George and the vendor are brought to trial. At trial, the prosecution alleges that each of the defendants were party to a joint enterprise to inflict serious bodily harm on the batsman, ‘There was no evidence that Ashley or Cecile inflicted the fatal injury. The person who inflicted the fatal injury most likely escaped arrest. Ashley and Cecile both say they joined the enterprise with at most, an intent to cause serious harm. Ashley and Cecile both deny possession of the knife and also deny the awareness that anyone else in the group intended to kill or had a knife. Ashley and Cecile are convicted of murder,You are a clerk to the Court of Appeal and are asked to write a legal memorandum discussing the extent to which Ashley, Cecile, George and the vendor are liable for the bbatsman’s death, In his study group Adrian says, “There is no point to the doctrine of incitement and it should not be the basis of liability. After all, the incitor presents no significant social danger. The incitor is clearly a chicken and has shown that she is unwilling to carry out the criminal plan herself.” Danae a group member responds by saying, “That's not truc! If anything. incitement is even more dangerous than an attempt because it allows for a level of cooperation criminals that makes the crime much more likely to occur. Moreover, the person who incites the crime shows a level of criminal sophistication and premeditation that not all criminals have.” Analyse the doctrine of incitement, making reference to case law, and explain whether you agree with Adrian or Danae. END OF QUESTION PAPER ‘Semester 1.2012/2013.