Here is some helpful Examination tips for Law, primarily dealing with Homicide Scenario questions. There from a second year textbook, but could easily be translated into first year.
Answering Scenario Questions
Both OCR and WJEC examination papers require candidates to answer problem questions. In these a scenario is set out and candidates have to explain whether someone is liable for a ceiminal offence. There are 4 key points to remember when answering such questions. These are:
- Identify the offence (and possible defences)
- Define the law on the offence (or defences)
- Expand that deifnition with relevant sections and/or cases
- Apply the law to the facts given in the scenario.
As you will see, the first letters of these 4 points spell out the word
IDEA. So, go into the exam remembering your great
IDEA!
As well as general points, there are also ways of approaching scenarios on specific areas of law to make sure that you do Identify the relevant points to be discuss.
When considering a murder problem in an examination question, always consider whether the Actus Reas (AR) and/or the Mens Rea (MR) need discussion for the specific scenario that you have been given. For example, if the facts in the question state that V was shot dead, then there is no need to discuss the AR or any aspect of causation. However, if you are told that D was shot and taken to hospital where he was given the wrong blood and died, then causation is very relevant.
Also, remember that the scenario may involve other points. It may be a situation where it is uncertain whether D had the MR for murder or not. It will therefore be necessary to consider involuntary manslaughter as an alternative.
Alternatively, there may be a defence available to the defendant. Different types of defence have different effects on the verdict. For example, the special defences of diminished responsibilty and provocation can reduce the mandatory life sentence for murder reduced to anything up to a life sentence for manslaughter.
If a defendant proves he was insane at the time of the killing he will not be guilty by reason of insanity. If the defendant successfully pleads automatism, mistake or self-defence he is entitled to be acquitted of murder. If he is intoxicated he may not have the necessary intention for murder.
The following flowchart takes you through the different points you may have to consider.
Did the defendant do an act which caused Vs death? ----> No, not guilty of murder
|
|
v
Yes
Did the defendant intend to kill or cause GBH? ----> No, not guilty of murder but consider involuntary manslaughter
|
|
v
Yes
Was the defendant suffering from Diminished Responsibilty? ----> Yes, not guilty of murder, but guilty of voluntary manslaughter.
|
|
v
No
Was the defendant provoked? ----> Yes, not guilty of murder but guilty of voluntary manslaughter.
|
|
v
No
Was the defendant insane? ----> Yes, not guilty of murder by reason of insanity
|
|
v
No
Was the defendant acting in self-defence and used reasonable force in the circumstances as he believed them to be? ----> Yes, not guilty of murder
|
|
v
No
Does the defendant have another defence available to him? (Automatism, Mistake, Intoxication) ----> Yes, not guilty of murder
|
|
v
No
Guilty of murder
