1.Easy
Unlawful act manslaughter is a form of:
- AVoluntary manslaughter
- BInvoluntary manslaughter
- CDiminished responsibility
- DAttempted murder
2.Easy
A person who helps or encourages another to commit a crime, without carrying out the act themselves, is called:
- AA principal offender
- BAn innocent agent
- CA co-defendant witness
- DAn accessory (secondary party)
3.Easy
An "either-way" offence is one that:
- ACan be tried in either the magistrates' court or the Crown Court
- BCan be committed either by act or by omission
- CCan lead either to prison or to a fine only
- DCan be prosecuted either by the CPS or by the victim as a private prosecutor
4.Medium
Joint enterprise (accessorial liability) after R v Jogee requires that the accessory:
- AWas present at the scene by chance
- BMerely foresaw as a real possibility that the principal might commit the crime
- CIntended to assist or encourage the principal to commit the crime
- DWas related to the principal
5.Medium
Involuntary intoxication can be a defence when:
- AThe defendant was less inhibited but still formed intent
- BThe defendant chose to drink heavily
- CThe offence is a strict liability offence
- DIt meant the defendant lacked the required mens rea
6.Medium
"Dolus eventualis" (voorwaardelijk opzet) in Dutch criminal law means the defendant:
- AKnowingly accepted the considerable chance that the consequence would occur
- BDid not foresee the consequence at all
- CActed entirely by accident
- DWanted the consequence as their main goal and acted in order to bring it about
7.Hard
In Sweet v Parsley (1970), a landlady was convicted of being concerned in the management of premises used for smoking cannabis. The House of Lords:
- AHeld that cannabis offences require a commercial purpose
- BHeld that landladies have a duty to search their tenants
- CUpheld the conviction because drug offences are always strict liability in order to protect public health
- DQuashed the conviction, holding that mens rea is presumed unless Parliament clearly excludes it
8.Hard
In Re A (Conjoined Twins) (2001), the Court of Appeal allowed surgery that would kill the weaker twin to save the stronger. This is often cited as authority that:
- AParental consent is a defence to homicide
- BNecessity is a general defence to murder whenever more lives would be saved than lost
- CDoctors can never be liable for murder
- DNecessity can, in very exceptional circumstances, justify an act that causes death
Answer key
- 1. B · Involuntary manslaughter
- 2. D · An accessory (secondary party)
- 3. A · Can be tried in either the magistrates' court or the Crown Court
- 4. C · Intended to assist or encourage the principal to commit the crime
- 5. D · It meant the defendant lacked the required mens rea
- 6. A · Knowingly accepted the considerable chance that the consequence would occur
- 7. D · Quashed the conviction, holding that mens rea is presumed unless Parliament clearly excludes it
- 8. D · Necessity can, in very exceptional circumstances, justify an act that causes death
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.