Criminal law revision tips - Less than a 1000 words is usually a red flag - Simmester article for causation, lecture sheet, textbook chapter - When citing an article, look at the introduction and conclusion first and then figure out the main arguments and comment on those - Different subheadings for different potential offences - Voluntary manslaughter is when a partial defense for murder reduces to voluntary manslaughter - Don't repeat analysis between two different sections, also go with the most serious offence first 'An appeal to "broad common sense" in the application of any law does not relieve a court from the obligation of identifying the boundaries within which a jury will be asked to bring to bear its common sense and experience of life. [Deceptions by A which cause B to factually consent to sexual activity only fall within those boundaries if they are] closely connected to the performance of the sexual act, or are intrinsically so fundamental, owing to that connection, that they can be treated as cases of impersonation.' (LORD BURNETT CJ) Evaluate the current law in light of this statement, and discuss what - if any - reform to this area of the law you consider necessary. -Yes, but the boundaries that exist are too narrow - Current law refers to nature and purpose - Very narrow :- e- immediate physical proximity and other things to be protected with OAPA e- Unfair and unclear outcomes arise (menally) " This is where the idea of common sense arises, are they saying that- if you are transgender that you should always- - Make it broader: nature should go beyond immediate nature o More room for common sense o Protect sexual autonomy and change conception of that o Gibson says create a new offence of sex by deception - Tom's structure o What is the law o Pull out key concepts to evaluate from the quote o Shorter section on reforms to link back to what was said previously (Gibson and Bergleson)
'Changing the mens rea for murder so as to require an intention to kill would restrict the reach of the offence appropriately. The partial defences to murder should then be abolished.' Discuss. This question requires 3 steps of analysis: i) an explanation of the exact way the crime of murder would be restricted by changing the mens rea, ii) an evaluation of whether this restriction is appropriate and iii) a discussion of whether it then logically follows that the partial defences to murder should be abolished. Before that, it is important to recall what the current mens rea for murder is and what the partial defences are. The current law on murder requires either an intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm and the partial defences include situations of diminished responsibility and where the defendant could be said to be in a situation of loss of control. Taking i), the proposed reform would restrict murder strictly to situations where there was an intention to kill.