Criminal law worksheet with answers

Under the Criminal Damage Act 1971, criminal damage by fire is charged as:

1. AAggravated theft
2. BAffray
3. CBurglary
4. DArson

Which is the difference between theft and robbery in English law?

1. ARobbery involves only cars
2. BTheft is always more serious than robbery
3. CRobbery does not require taking property
4. DRobbery is theft accompanied by force or the threat of force

Handling stolen goods (section 22 Theft Act 1968) requires that the defendant:

1. AKnew or believed the goods to be stolen
2. BStole the goods personally
3. CKept the goods for over a month
4. DSold the goods for profit

D parks his car on a police officer's foot by accident, then refuses to move it once told. Under Fagan v MPC, this is:

1. AA mere omission without any duty to act
2. BNo offence, because the original act was accidental and mens rea arose only afterwards
3. COnly criminal damage to the officer's shoe
4. DA battery, because the act was continuing when the mens rea arose

Strict liability offences are offences where:

1. AThe defendant must confess
2. BLiability arises only if the defendant was negligent as to every element
3. CNo mens rea is required for at least one element of the actus reus
4. DOnly intentional acts count

In English law, the mens rea of murder is:

1. AIntention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm
2. BSubjective recklessness as to causing death or serious harm
3. CIntention to frighten the victim
4. DNegligence in causing death

Under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, an organisation is guilty if the way its activities are managed causes death and amounts to a gross breach of a duty of care, and:

1. AThe organisation intended to cause death
2. BThe victim was an employee of the organisation
3. CThe way senior management organised the activities was a substantial element of the breach
4. DA single identified director is first personally convicted of gross negligence manslaughter

In "Thabo Meli v R", the defendants beat the victim, believed him dead and threw him off a cliff, where he died of exposure. The court held:

1. AThe defendants were guilty only of attempted murder
2. BThe victim's death was not caused by the defendants
3. CThe series of acts formed one transaction, so actus reus and mens rea coincided
4. DThere was no murder because the mens rea existed only before the act that actually caused death