Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Criminal Law; Physical Harm Case. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 4 page paper looks at a case study supplied by the student. The case looks at criminal law and potential offences resulting from physical harm. The first part of the case sees a person harmed as a result of a thrown bottle, with the defendant claiming they meant to frighten and not harm. The second part of the paper sees a defended maliciously loosen wheel nuts on a car which subsequently crashes. The writer looks at what offences may have occurred according to English law. The bibliography cites 5 sources.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEphysharm.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
wearing a supporters scarf, resulting in a cut face and stitches, and the following week Oliver loosens the wheel of the coaches car, causing a crash and harming the
coach and other road users. For this we need to look at the actions and nature of those action to assess what non fatal offences may have been committed.
For criminal liability to exist we also need to consider the elements, those of actus reus and mens rea. With actus reus we can consult with the case of Haughton
v Smith [1973] All ER 1109 where Lord Hailsham stated "an act does not make a man guilty of a crime, unless his mind also be guilty" (Ivamy, 2000). Actus
reus will usual consist of three different elements, conduct, consequences and circumstances. However, some crimes may be purely seen as a result of the conduct, others will need the conduct
to create specific consequences. For criminal liability to exist there needs to a proven actus reus, as shown in the case of R v Deller (1952). The actus reus must
be undertaken voluntarily, if it not, as in R v Mitchell (1983), then there is not full actus reus (Herring, 2004). There is little doubt that the acts in
both cases. Stan said he did not mean to hurt Helen, only frighten her, so as there is the act we need to look at the mental attitude behind the
act. Mens rea may be seen as more applicable in terms of the action of Dinsdale as in this aspect there has to be proven that the defendant would have
the defined state of mind that caused the event. Here there is not an need to consider why the actions were undertaken, only that they were.
...