1.Easy
What is the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales?
- A12
- B16
- C14
- D10
2.Easy
Which sentence must a court impose on an adult convicted of murder in England and Wales?
- AA community order
- BLife imprisonment
- CA suspended sentence
- DA fixed term of 10 years
3.Easy
An attempt to commit a crime means:
- ACommitting the full offence
- BTalking to a friend about a crime
- CPlanning a crime in detail and buying the equipment needed later to commit it
- DDoing more than merely preparatory acts with intent to commit the offence
4.Medium
Oblique (indirect) intention in English law (R v Woollin) exists when:
- AThe result was merely possible
- BDeath was a foreseeable consequence that a reasonable person would have appreciated
- CDeath or serious harm was a virtual certainty and the defendant appreciated this
- DThe defendant did not foresee any harm
5.Medium
D, carrying an imitation gun and a threatening note, walks towards a post office to rob it but is arrested outside before entering. Under the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, D is most likely guilty of:
- ANothing as attempted robbery yet, because D has not gone beyond preparation
- BRobbery, because the intention was proved
- CAttempted robbery, because D was carrying an imitation gun and a threatening note
- DBurglary, because D intended to enter the building
6.Medium
D is present when a crime is committed but does nothing to help or encourage it. Following R v Clarkson, D is:
- AThe principal, because D witnessed the whole crime
- BAn accessory, because voluntary presence at the scene always amounts to encouragement
- CAn accessory, because D could have called the police
- DNot an accessory, because mere presence without intent to encourage is not enough
7.Hard
In the Dutch "Melk-en-water" judgment (Hoge Raad, 1916), the court recognised:
- AForce majeure as a written justification
- BThe legality principle as part of the Constitution
- CAbsence of all blame (AVAS) as an unwritten excuse
- DConditional intent as a form of intention
8.Hard
In R v Roberts (1971), a woman jumped from a moving car to escape a sexual assault and was injured. The court held the defendant liable unless her reaction was:
- AMore dangerous than staying in the car
- BTaken without first asking the defendant to stop the car and let her out
- CCaused by her own panic and fear
- DSo "daft" or unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it
Answer key
- 1. D · 10
- 2. B · Life imprisonment
- 3. D · Doing more than merely preparatory acts with intent to commit the offence
- 4. C · Death or serious harm was a virtual certainty and the defendant appreciated this
- 5. A · Nothing as attempted robbery yet, because D has not gone beyond preparation
- 6. D · Not an accessory, because mere presence without intent to encourage is not enough
- 7. C · Absence of all blame (AVAS) as an unwritten excuse
- 8. D · So "daft" or unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.