Legal studies - crimes, defences, murder & rape

An act or omission that is against the law

Harmful to an idividual(s)

Punishable by laws

Failure to carry out an action

Protect individuals

Protect property

Protect community

Promote justice

establishing crimes and processes through the use of law

the aim of the law in this sense is to protect people from such crimes such as loss or theft

this is a central part of social cohesion

its to maintain community safety

aims to protect private property such as land, environment and personal property (homes, etc.)

Maintaining public order and community safety

preventing vigilantes from punishing someone without the proper use of the legal system

provides the process to deal with legal offenders

doesnt let law fall into the wrong hands

the accused or alleged offender is presumed to be INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

it means that the accused cannot be punished unless PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

this means that it is unquestionably right or wrong without any other logical explanation.

cannot be "possibly" cannot be hypothetical

needs to be as close to the truth as possible, preferably the truth.

The prosecution of present physical evidence to the court to prove unquestionably that the accused is guilty, meaning that the innocent does not need to prove their evidence.

meaning that the prosecution is meant to provide SUFFICIENT evidence of the guilt of the accused.

this also means that the accused cannot apply for a bail unless they are completely sure and safe.

has the right to a legal representation in the court (lawyer)

accused has the right of silence

anyone who is found guilty has the right to appeal for a wrongful conviction

this means that the accused has the right to remain silent, this doesnt however directly translate to them being guilty.

As a general rule, the accused previous convictions cannot be revealed in court until the sentencing process begins. this is to keep the unbiased nature of the court hearing

• actus reus

• mens rea

• strict liability

• age of criminal responsibility

• burden of proof

• standard of proof

Guilty act

the physical act of carrying out a crime

• prosecution must prove that the offender is guilty

Guilty mind

the planning out or awareness of the crime committed

• the prosecutor must then prove that the accused knowingly did the crime

The responsibility of committing a crime can be done without having the intent and without having to prove mens rea - the planning of a crime

drinking and driving

not tapping on the myki (an omission)

failure to show the p plate on a probation license (omission)

meaning that at a certain age someone can or cannot be charged with a crime

the age that someone can be charged

cannot be charged with a crime

Doli incapax - incapable of evil

meaning that though they may have committed the crime, it is assumed that their brains havent yet reached the capacity of registering the depth of the crime and to know the difference between good or bad, this however needs to be known and proven in court

They can be criminally liable for their actions and can be charged for their crime

this is because they have reached a presumed state of being able to comprehend their crime

held by the person or party that has brought the accused into court

this would be the king, but a representative is what brings them to court.

the party needs to prove the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt

the strength or degree in which the case must be proven

the burden of proof states that the party bringing the accused to court must be proven guilty however the standard of proof is the degree in which it must be proven. meaning that though they are both similar in their function, the burden of proof is to prove guilt, while the standard of proof how much it needs to be proven.

against person

property and deception offences

drug offences

public order and security

justice procedures and offences

other offences

against individuals

Homicide, sexual assault, stalking, harassment.

arson, property damage, burglary, theft, breaking and entering

drug trafficking, dealing, manufacturing, using drugs, possessing drugs

weapons, explosives, public security offences (terrorism), disorderly offensive conduct

perjury - giving false evidence under oath. contempt of court

regulatory driving offences, transport regulation offences

These are serious criminal offences which would be heard by a judge if the accused pleads not-guilty.

examples include - homicide, culpable driving causing death and rape

Minor offences which are generally heard in the magistrates court and without a jury because they are less severe in nature.

examples include - drinking and driving, disorderly conduct and minor offences

the degree to which people are responsible for their actions

Self defence

Mental impairment

Duress

Sudden or extraordinary emergency

Automatism

Intoxication

Accident

accused must

• believe that their actions were necessary

• have no other reasonable option in the time of the offence

accused must

• not have known due to little knowledge or awareness of their actions

• didnt know that their actions were that of wrong conduct or was not able to think about their conduct typically. (not under the influence of something, but that they were genuinely mentally impaired.)

accused must

• have believed that they were under a threat of harm

• the threat would have been carried out unless the action was undertaken

• doing it was the only way to avoid harm

• have believed that it was a reasonable response to a threat

accused can use this defence if

• there was a real sudden or extraordinary emergency

• actions were the only reasonable way out of dealing with the situation

• actions was a reasonable response

accused may use this defence if

• they were sleeping or sleep walking

• suffering from a concussion

• were the result of an epileptic seizure

• result of a true medical condition due to a side effect of a perscribed and properly used medication

can be used if

• at the time of offence, their actions were involuntary, not planned out and without intent due to being intoxicated.

• was not self induced intoxication

• can also be the result of incorrectly but properly used perscribed medication

may be used if

• the actions were truly unintentional, involuntarily or reasonably unenforceable

• this also has the exception of strict liability for an accused to be found guilty

not needing the mens rea or the conscious planning of something to commit the crime or offence.

that outside of the defences, the court may also deem someone unfit to stand trial but is still charged for their offence

• unable to undertake a number of tasks at the time of trial

• unable to give a plea (guilty or not guilty)

• unable to follow the course of a trial

• unable to instruct their lawyer.

intentionally and unlawfully killing another person with malicious intent by someone who is over the age of discretion.

the intention to kill or seriously injure a person

having malicious intention

• killing without legal justification

• meaning that they were not under legal discretion to kill another person.

• murder, manslaughter, infanticide, child homicide, culpable driving causing death

unlawful

victim was another human being

accused is over age of discretion

accused victim's dead

accused had a sound mind

malice aforethought

-all 6 elements must be proven

-no malice aforethought

-break in causation and actions didnt significantly harm or cause the victims death

-not of sound mind during the offence

disruption of the family

family status and reputation

loss of a life

disruption of safety

loss of workplace productivity

guilt or shame

loss of household income

diminishment of family social standing and wellbeing

the act of intentionally sexually penetrating another person who did not give consent.

prosecution must prove

• there was sexual penetration

• no consent

• lack of reasonable belief that consent was given

they may argue that

• there was no sexual penetration

• consent was given

• there was reasonable belief that consent was given

• • general defences

family

• fear, trauma, injuries, mistrust

on community

• cost, loss of community, distrust in the law

offender

• medical treatments (if mentally impaired), legal costs, lost labour