Preview

Intro to Law - Outline of Essay

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1217 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Intro to Law - Outline of Essay
The scenario of this case a very complex matter in terms of the law, on the one hand you have the breach of gun/firearms laws and criminal negligence and on the other hand you have involuntary harm to another person. In order to hold the correct person liable, we must first examine the core facts and issues of this case which will enable the application of the law to these facts, allowing the DPP to be advised in the most suitable and accurate manner.

The first and foremost issue to be noted in this case is that of Francis carelessly shooting his gun in the direction of Nigel and also that of Nigel responding and in turn shooting towards Francis. Had Francis not fired his gun towards Nigel could there be a possibility that Nigel would not in turn shoot back at Francis causing Aiden to be wounded in the crossfire? Was Francis acting in this manner due to provocation from Nigel? Could it also be possible that Nigel reacted and shot back at Francis in self defence with the fear of being shot himself driving him? Could Nigel have fired back due to provocation from Francis? If these initial events had not happened is it possible that Aiden would still be alive today? Upon deciding to bring the victim to hospital, Nigel criticized Francis’s method of carrying Aiden (an issue which is not in clear violation of any law) leading to Francis abandoning Aiden and leaving the scene and Nigel carrying the victim in a very poor manner back towards to car. Had Francis continued carrying Aiden to the car, would this had meant that his medical condition would not have deteriorated due to poor care carried out by Nigel afterwards? Even though Francis did not shoot Aiden, would the fact that he assumed a liable role to help bring the victim to hospital, though not legally obliged to do so, but then decided to leave half way through render him guilty of breaking a law because he did not carry out the act of choosing to assist a victim in need of medical care to the best of his

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    On the morning of Sunday 21st April 1996, a young Hobart man, Martin Bryant armed himself with three high powered automatic firearms and a large quantity of ammunition and then drove to Port Arthur. North of Port Arthur, he entered the home of a couple he briefly met as a child. Inside he started his rampage, shooting them both. Once he arrived at the Historical Site Port Arthur he ate a meal at the Broad Arrow Café. He then waited till his meal was finished to take his rifle from his bag and began to indiscriminately shoot around the crowded Cafe. Within the first 90 seconds, 20 people had died and 12 were injured. The man then moved to the adjacent car park, where he shot and killed four more people and added to the toll of injured people as well. After shooting at people in the grounds of the Historic Site, he maneuvered into his car and drove up the former main entrance road to the original toll booth. In this area, seven more people were killed in two separate incidents, during which he stole a victim’s car and abandoned his own. Driving north to a General Store, he killed another person and took one hostage then drove back to the place of his first killings, firing random shots at vehicles along the way. At the house, he continued to set fire to the stolen car and then took his hostage inside. Through the afternoon and night, shots were fired at police officers on the scene. At some point during this time, Bryant killed the hostage. When morning arrived, he set fire to the house and was captured by police as he fled. By the time the incidents had finished he had killed 35 people and injured 18. . Bryant had 72 criminal charges pressed against him and 551 witness statements were entered. After initially pleading “not guilty” to 72 charges, his plea was changed after conversations with his lawyer. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with no eligibility for parole on all 35 murder charges, plus 21 years for each of the remaining counts of the indictment.…

    • 903 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    (A) No person, while under the influence of sudden passion or in a sudden fit of rage, either of which is brought on by serious provocation occasioned by the victim that is reasonably sufficient to incite the person into using deadly force, shall knowingly cause the death of another.…

    • 287 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Legal Studies Report/ Essay

    • 2942 Words
    • 12 Pages

    In October 2008, 20 year old Kathleen Worrall stabbed her younger sister Susan to death. She suffered more than fifty wounds. Kathleen was initially charged with the murder of her sister, which was later changed to manslaughter for which she pleaded guilty. Kathleen had a hormonal condition, congenital adrenal hyperplasia which leads to excess production of testosterone. It had been controlled with medication, but Kathleen grew self-conscious about the side-effect of significant weight gain and did not stick to her treatment regime.…

    • 2942 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The rule applies to sellers liable for defective products due to a flaw in he manufacturer, or due to a design defect failure to warn.…

    • 365 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    essay for NFO in law

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages

    First of all there is a battery with the initial contact that Jameela has on Ken. The AR of battery is “infliction of unlawful violence”. Battery is defined as being the slightest touch without permission as in the case of Cole v Turner, the knocking in to Ken is this touch without his permission. When she knocked into Ken this led to him to fall. This is an ABH as this battery led to further damage with Ken falling down. The AR of ABH is “common assault occasioning in actual bodily harm”. Miller defines this as “any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the v”, in which the falling down would cause Ken to experience some discomfort with falling to the ground. However this fall resulted in Ken breaking his hip. This is a GBH S20 as this break would have caused him to go to hospital. The AR of GBH S20 is “causing wound or GBH”. There isn’t a wound and therefore there is only grievous bodily harm. The case of Smith defines grievous as meaning really serious harm which includes broken bones. The case of Bollom states that the seriousness of the harm scales with the age of the victim, as Ken in this scenario is elderly man the seriousness of the fall was serious as his body is weaker and therefore there is more damage that is done, affecting the graveness of the injury. Therefore the AR of GBH S20 has been established.…

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    A2 OCR Law - Intention

    • 1888 Words
    • 8 Pages

    R v G and another [2003] had a significant impact on the law of recklessness, as it held that a defendant must have subjectively appreciated a risk to be found criminally liable, and that he must have in the circumstances known to him appreciated that it was unreasonable to take such a risk. The reintroduction of a subjective test for recklessness allows defendants to be judged on their age, character, and understanding, and take all these necessary factors into account to ensure the fairest judgement will arise from future cases.…

    • 1888 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    TRUE/FALSE QUESTIONS A1. The stability and predictability of the law is essential to business activities. ANSWER: T PAGE: NAT: AACSB Analytic B1. 2 TYPE: AICPA Critical Thinking =…

    • 4405 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Business Law 4th Case

    • 455 Words
    • 2 Pages

    ISSUE: Whether or not the Defendant ‘caused’ the death, as a matter of law, under M.G.L. Chapter 90, Section 24G, where the [Defendant] was operating a motorcycle at high speeds through residential areas and the Officer, while pursuing the defendant, lost control of his cruiser and died as a result of colliding with a tree.…

    • 455 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Both defendants must have seen a risk of harm, serious harm or death. The prosecution must provide evidence showing that both Stone and Dobinson were reckless towards the deceased. Although they did provide a duty of care towards Fanny their actions were not reckless. Lord Hewart states in Rex v Bateman [1925] 19 Cr. App.…

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Introduction to Law

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages

    A movie star sued a tabloid newspaper for statements it made regarding her abuse of drugs. The story was not true, having been invented by the editors to sell newspapers. Assume the movie star lost several employment opportunities because of the story and she decided to sue.…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    References: Hartley, R. D., & Rabe, G. A. (2008). Criminal Courts: Structures, Process, and Issues (2nd ed.).…

    • 1585 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    I am assessing Jimmy’s liability for the death of Bruce. This question is set out under the field of Homicide, as there has been an unlawful killing. The likely charge against Jimmy is Murder. Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being with the intention to kill or cause GBH. (Moloney) for the first part of the question I will present the prosecution case and for the second part I will present the defence and lastly I will conclude.…

    • 964 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Homicide is defined as the killing of another human being by another person. When a homicide occurs, there are distinctions in the law as to the type of homicide committed, such as first degree, or premeditated murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, and negligent. In order to determine which type occurred, the elements of the incident are examined. These are intent, whether criminal or negligible, the act, and the causation. Each of these elements will determine the consequences a person might be facing.…

    • 1131 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The issue being presented in this case deals with whether or not it was unlawful for Joe Roberts to possess a machine-gun he built and displayed locally. Mr. Roberts knew it was illegal to buy a machine-gun so he built his own gun thinking it was legal because it never traveled interstate and he destroyed the mold he used to make the gun.…

    • 405 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ah Chong was not held liable for the death of his roommate. The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts conviction of homicide, saying that Ah Chong committed a mistake of fact. He would not have stabbed his roommate had he known the identity of the person who entered the room. If the person who opened the door had really been a robber instead of his roommate, he would not be criminally liable if he had stabbed that person in…

    • 280 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays