Teaching Notes for G153 OCR Criminal Law

1. Starter:
Complete the Dominoes
All of you should be able
to complete the
dominoes using your
hand outs
Most of you should be
able to use teamwork
and understanding to
work out the order of
the dominoes… but not
a hand out
Some of you will be able
to explain why issues
other than strict
‘causation’ have been
included, and what they
have in common with
the current topic.

2. Starter:
Complete the Dominoes

3. … and to start with, complete your
section C response.
Damian and Juan are arguing and Damian pulls out a knife. Juan runs into the road and knocks over a cyclist,
Brenda. Juan suffers bruising and a small cut from the collision. Brenda falls under the wheels of Manuel’s car and
suffers head injuries. Brenda has an unusually thin skill and dies.
Juan is scared to run into Damian again, and refuses to go to the doctor to get his injuries checked. After a couple of
weeks, his cut has become infected and he develops gangrene. Finally, he goes to hospital where Dr Smith advises
him to have the finger amputated. Damian agrees, but Dr Smith cuts off the wrong finger, and the gangrene
spreads, killing Juan.
Evaluate the accuracy of each of the four statements A, B, C, and D individually, as they apply to the facts in the
above scenario.
Statement C: Damian is not responsible for Juan’s death as it was Dr Smith’s error which caused the death.
Statement D: Damian is not responsible for Juan’s death Juan chose not to get treatment.
Complete the answer for statements A and B, to demonstrate your
skills.

4. Using everything you have learnt in this
first unit, complete the following…

5. Critically Responding:
“The approach of the courts to causation is unfair to the defendant”
Is this a correct statement of the law?
Although some defendants argue that they are held responsible for
harm which they did not directly cause, and therefore this is unfair.
the law on this area is simple and effective. In the case of ROBERTS, D
argued that he was not liable for the concussion and grazing to V, as it
was her free choice to jump out of the van, and therefore the victim
had caused her own injuries. Although this is strictly true, the court
pointed out that her actions were a foreseeable result of the initial
‘pawing’ and he should have considered the result as a possibility.
Therefore the approach of the courts is fair, as it takes into account
that D should be responsible for harm that they should have considered
might occur as the result of their actions, in much the same way that
they approach the issue of recklessness elsewhere in the law. This
approach has been confirmed by the more recent case of MAJORAM,
where to hold D not responsible for the injuries to V simply because in
her terror she had thrown her self out of the window, would have been
an unjust and unfair result. Her actions were the clear and direct
response to the violent threats of D. The current approach of the courts
therefore, seems to use common sense to determine D’s liability and
arguably even helps to avoid unfairness through the use of the ‘daft’
test – if V’s actions are completely disproportionate (throwing self off a
cliff in response to a jokey threat) then the chain will be broken.

7. Critically Responding:
“The approach of the courts to causation is unfair to the defendant”
Is this a correct statement of the law?
Task:
Here are seven critical statements relating to
the law on causation. Using what you have
learnt about the topic, and how to integrate
knowledge and criticism, you are going to
respond.
All of you should be able to explain why
one of these is an issue using a clearly
explained case to support your views
Most of you should be able to use the
words of the quote to develop your critical
response to the case, and link to a further
issue.
Some of you will be able to develop a true
discussion by introducing a counter point
and developing that using a further case or
other area of the topic.
The current law fits the
concept of personal
responsibility.
The original actor is always
blamed more than any other
regardless of the amount of
further harm caused.
Sometimes
public policy
seems to
override legal
principle
Should D be liable
for something they
never even knew D
thought or believed?
The policy decisions regarding doctors are
essential to allow them to do their jobs.
The approach of the courts to the different things
that can challenge the chain is inconsistent.

8. Your Omissions Essays:
 Knowledge of cases and what was decided.
 Range of cases and knowledge used.
 Definitions
 Identifying some issues.
 Some people: using the cases as the basis of the AO2
 Too much detail on the facts (it’s a fine line)
 Stating problems rather than discussing them
 Just ‘dumping’ all your knowledge without reference to the
question
 Not looking at the consistency of the decisions.
 Not using the key words of the quote to frame their critical
feedback
 Some: Missing whole portions of essays or no conclusion.
 Some: not using their own understanding or knowledge

9. What are you going to do to improve?
Next lesson, you are going to use the feedback and your
understanding to complete an essay on causation in class time.
Responding to an essay…
 Look at the comments, and read
what I have written carefully.
 Ask any questions!
 Using the feedback sheet, set
yourself one target to improve (this
will be the focus of your rewritten
essay)
 Identify one thing you have done
wee.
Bear in mind what you now know
about the mark scheme, and the
feedback you gave the sample essay on
intention.
So what exactly is Miss Hart expecting from us?

10. “The approach of the courts to the issues of causation is unfair to the defendant”
Discuss how far this is a correct statement of the law [50]
You have the remainder of this
lesson to plan your response.
You have all been given an A4
plan sheet, which must be
handed in with the completed
essay tomorrow.
You will be able to use your hand
outs and plans tomorrow, but
will only have two hours to
complete the final essay.
You will have to sign the
confirmation of individual work
before submitting your response.

11. Plenary:
Complete your triangle and pop it in the box!

12. Homework:
I would like you to find out the :
• Facts
• Issue of appeal
• Decision
• What impact that had on D’s liability
A-B Level should also include:
• Linked case
• Area of law
For the following cases:
R v Whybrow 1951
R v Guellefer 1990
R v Jones 2007
And bring them to the lesson on
Thursday 10th July 2014