A good way to study - Crime (1 Viewer)

[Jago]

discuss (using legislations/media sources/cases, if appropriate) the factors affecting the sentencing decision.

 

[melsc]

im using the defence of provocation
i was provoked after melsc threatened 2 steal my pants

two preliminary offences are:
conspiracy
attempt

edit: now she wants jagos pants
melsc is the new BOS slut
ur worse than kate tully and daniellem melsc!

Shut up joe...I am just jking...u'd be suprised how unslutty i am,...however going to scouts with mostly guys...u develop a gutter mind and sense of humour

 

[goan_crazy]

discuss (using legislations/media sources/cases, if appropriate) the factors affecting the sentencing decision.

factors affecting the decision are mitigating and agravating decisions
use of judicial discretion e.g. the julietta dawes case

 

[Jago]

We should have a thread dedicated to legislations/media sources/cases.

Now answer my questions.

 

[goan_crazy]

discuss (using legislations/media sources/cases, if appropriate) the factors affecting the sentencing decision.

factors affecting the decision are mitigating and agravating decisions
use of judicial discretion e.g. the julietta dawes case

melsc, dont talk bout throwing ppl off bridges, im still getting over how some1 i knew jumped of anzac bridge
melsc

 

[wrong_turn]

sorry but you are all wrong. supreme court for sexual assault, sedition is straight to the high court. and please answer the first question i asked!!!

*melsc you do remember which corner?? i'll give you a second pair to add to you're shrine of me*

 

[melsc]

factors affecting the decision are mitigating and agravating decisions
use of judicial discretion e.g. the julietta dawes case

Seriously joe u need to ask a question its not fair

 

[goan_crazy]

LCMD thread been set up
http://www.boredofstudies.org/community/showthread.php?p=1410791#post1410791
enjoy

what is larceny?

 

[melsc]

sorry but you are all wrong. supreme court for sexual assault, sedition is straight to the high court. and please answer the first question i asked!!!

*melsc you do remember which corner?? i'll give you a second pair to add to you're shrine of me*

Yes but u said FIRST be briugh to every case has comittakl @ local court

 

[Jago]

Wouldn't there be a comittal hearing first do decide if there's enough evidence?

 

[melsc]

Wouldn't there be a comittal hearing first do decide if there's enough evidence?

My point exaclty

 

[wrong_turn]

no because sexual assault is such a serious crime that it foes straight to the supreme court. one such example is Bilal Skaf, Mohammed Skaf case

 

[goan_crazy]

melsc i shouldnt hav told u how 2 use the chainsaw face...
ur wearing it out now!

what is a prima facie case?

 

[melsc]

what abt haduis corpus

 

[wrong_turn]

it is when there is enough evidence to support a case. primie facie: on the face of it.

what is the time limit for being held in questioning?

 

[Jago]

It's like 6 hours isn't it? Longer if you're intoxicated.

Define: Novus actus interveniens.

 

[melsc]

It's like 6 hours isn't it? Longer if you're intoxicated.

Define: Novus actus interveniens.

I dont know this one...*damn it no more saying latin words to sound intelligent*

 

[manifestation]

what is larceny?

Getting back to what this whole thread is really about ahem Melsc and wrong turn!


Larceny is: An old English criminal and common law offence covering the unlawful or fraudulent removal of another's property without the owner's consent. The offence of theft now covers most cases of larceny. But larceny is wider than theft as it includes the taking of property of another person by whatever means (by theft, overtly , by fraud, by trickery, etc.) if an intent exists to convert that property to one's own use against the wishes of the owner.

okay next question:
and plz stick 2 what the thread is about!! What is strict liability with one example!!

 

[Jago]

haha that was a difficult definition though.

The Latin term novus actus interveniens applies to causation.

Novus actus interveniens means a new intervening act must occour for the chain of causation to be broken.

 

[roadcone]

It's like 6 hours isn't it? Longer if you're intoxicated.

Define: Novus actus interveniens.

Under the Crimes (Detention After Arrest) Act 1997 you can be kept in custody for up to 4 hours. If they want to take DNA tests they can keep you an extra 2 hours. Any time over this and I am pretty sure they need to get an order from either a magistrate or a judge to allow for it.