Criminal Law Exam Review

STRUCTURE - 8 questions → you must answer 4 (at least one essay and one problem) - Total is 4000 words (including footnotes) REFERENCING: ● No formal system of footnoting, quotations, or case citations is laid down. ● However, you should provide the source of the points you make, authority should be cited, and arguments and material derived from others should be appropriately referenced. ● You can do this either in the text, just as you would in any examination, or by including citations in footnotes (if you choose to use footnotes). ● You must be very careful to cite properly as otherwise this risks potential plagiarism. ● You are reminded that the use of all AI sites and tools, including ChatGPT (any version), in this assessment is prohibited and will, therefore, be considered an academic offence. TO STUDY - Have cases ready Have articles/secondary sources ready (a recap of each source) Be able to EXPLAIN THE LAW There's no time to study → organise notes well ESSAYS: Make sure that essays have a clear structure, with a clear, concise introduction that contextualizes the issue, identifies what you will argue, and sets out how you will do so structurally. Saying “I will explore X” is not identifying your argument: after you explore X, what will you argue? Use subheadings that organize your essay logically. Stick to the question, and don’t just talk about the general area. Explain the law, but do not just give a descriptive account of the issue. Every essay requires a significant amount of critical discussion. Use quality academic sources here to enrich the discussion and support your point. Have these read in advance rather than conducting research in the 8-hour window. In other words, finding and summarizing academic commentary on key debates is part of your preparation for the exam. PROBLEM QUESTIONS: Follow a clear, methodical structure. Most problems are caused by students not taking this seriously. Every problem question should start by explicitly identifying the offence that you are assessing for (i.e. “Based on the level of harm, Jerry can be assessed for s.47 – Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm.”). Do not juggle multiple options throughout. Start with the highest plausible option and only move on to another if it is not met. Answers should then first assess the actus reus, and then only after that the mens rea. Do not mix these. Be explicit and direct, e.g. “The actus reus for X offence is Y.” Define any elements of this that require it and assess whether these/the actus reus are satisfied. “The mens rea for X offence is W.” You stray from this method at your own peril. You need not have flashy or poetic writing. Clear, direct, concise, logical, and accurate reasoning is what you are after in problem questions. Following IRAC (Issue, Relevant law, Application, Conclusion) provides you a checklist to make sure that you do not miss anything and that your analysis is explicit. One common issue is that students state the law and conclude without actually applying it explicitly. For example, a student might say “Following Leader (2021), Jerry’s actions satisfy the actus reus.” This really only sets out a conclusion – it neither explicitly states the principle nor applies it. As another example, a student might say “The mens rea only requires that Jerry foresee some harm, not the full extent of it, and thus Jerry satisfies the mens rea of the offence.” This only the R and C, without any A, and even if you think the law’s application is obvious, what you are doing here is forcing your marker to do the application/analysis. This is very common in various forms, and you will not get points for the work markers have to do. Use accurate language in your analysis. If you say Jerry ought to have known something or that something was (reasonably) foreseeable, you will get the analysis wrong if the standard is knowledge or recklessness (both subjective). GENERAL NOTES/ SUMMATIVE FEEDBACK Answer the question(s) and do not get distracted by the facts of the case (discussing more defendants than needed). When a case includes rumors or assumptions about crimes having been committed, you should not address these. Do not assume facts that aren’t included. Structure systematically and chronologically. Use subheadings to organize your analyses. Walk your reader through each analysis: identify issue, state relevant law, apply, conclude. Don’t just jump forward to applying the law/concluding re: the controversial issue. Essay questions: Expressly state your argument/conclusion in your introduction. Use the body of the essay to provide context (if necessary), an explanation of the law, and an analysis. Conclude. → ESSAY - Include secondary literature Tell the reader the definition of the centre of the topic (here, consent) Connect critiwue to overarching themes and arguments in crimina law Pick two or three key points to focus on Need to demonstrate a COMPLETE assault Less history and more analysis of current cases → PROBLEM QUESTION - AR then MR → but AR elements must be in order State the possible offence in question IRAC method