Skip to document
Welcome to StudocuSign in to access the best study resources
Guest user
0followers
Upload
HomeMy LibraryAsk AI
  • You don't have any recent items yet.
My Library
  • You don't have any modules yet.
  • You don't have any books yet.
  • You don't have any Studylists yet.

Unit 15 - Prep Task - Dispute Resolution workshop 15 case analysis and aspects of evidence preparatory

Dispute Resolution workshop 15 case analysis and aspects of evidence p...
Module

LPC (LPC 2021)

468 Documents
Students shared 468 documents in this course
Academic year: 2022/2023
Uploaded by:
Anonymous Student
This document has been uploaded by a student, just like you, who decided to remain anonymous.
University of Essex

Recommended for you

Comments

Please sign in or register to post comments.

Students also viewed

Related documents

Preview text

Unit 15 Prep Task (a) What must the prosecution prove id ND is to be convicted? Who? ND Where, King Head Pub, Grape Street, Chltenham What? ND assaulted DP causing him ABH How? Punched him in the face, causing him a deep cut to his top lip requiring 4 stiches.

The burden of proof on the prosecution throughout is to prove that D committed the office beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution also has an initial evidential burden to show that ND has a case to answer, ie that there is sufficient credible evidence for each element of the offence. ND has evidential burden to raise some evidence of his defiance. Prosecution then to disprove D’s version of events.

(b) What evidence do the prosecution have to prove each element of the offence?  Interview at the police station on 11 December at 23:30, confessed that he did assault the man in the Kings Head.  Police officer who interviewed him can give evidence the confession was made, and the confession can establish all above elements of the offence.  Witness statement of the victim, DP.  Witness statement from Claudia Makowski. Court would need to infer ND was the aggressor.  Doctor, who provided evidence of the extent of injuries, can be used to establish the extent of assault.  Previous convictions: bad character evidence.

(c) What is ND’s defence?  Admits he punched DP but it was self-defence.  DP hit him first so he is self-defence.

(d) What evidence supports his defence?  ND can give oral evidence to this effect. Self-defence can be used as evidential burden. If ND put evidence forward, then the Crown will have to disprove the evidence beyond reasonable doubt. ND should give evidence himself in order to discharge his evidential burden. He will need to show how DP had attempted to hit him and how he defended himself.  Claudia can be cross examined at trial, her evidence is circumstantial, which could be challenged because she did not see who the aggressor was.

Was this document helpful?

Unit 15 - Prep Task - Dispute Resolution workshop 15 case analysis and aspects of evidence preparatory

Module: LPC (LPC 2021)

468 Documents
Students shared 468 documents in this course

University: University of Law

Was this document helpful?
Unit 15 Prep Task
(a) What must the prosecution prove id ND is to be convicted?
Who? ND
Where, King Head Pub, Grape Street, Chltenham
What? ND assaulted DP causing him ABH
How? Punched him in the face, causing him a deep cut to his top lip requiring 4 stiches.
The burden of proof on the prosecution throughout is to prove that D committed the office
beyond reasonable doubt.
Prosecution also has an initial evidential burden to show that ND has a case to answer, ie
that there is sufficient credible evidence for each element of the offence.
ND has evidential burden to raise some evidence of his defiance.
Prosecution then to disprove D’s version of events.
(b) What evidence do the prosecution have to prove each element of the offence?
Interview at the police station on 11 December at 23:30, confessed that he did assault
the man in the Kings Head.
Police officer who interviewed him can give evidence the confession was made, and the
confession can establish all above elements of the offence.
Witness statement of the victim, DP.
Witness statement from Claudia Makowski. Court would need to infer ND was the
aggressor.
Doctor, who provided evidence of the extent of injuries, can be used to establish the
extent of assault.
Previous convictions: bad character evidence.
(c) What is ND’s defence?
Admits he punched DP but it was self-defence.
DP hit him first so he is self-defence.
(d) What evidence supports his defence?
ND can give oral evidence to this effect. Self-defence can be used as evidential burden. If
ND put evidence forward, then the Crown will have to disprove the evidence beyond
reasonable doubt. ND should give evidence himself in order to discharge his evidential
burden. He will need to show how DP had attempted to hit him and how he defended
himself.
Claudia can be cross examined at trial, her evidence is circumstantial, which could be
challenged because she did not see who the aggressor was.

Students also viewed

Related documents