Law

Criminal Law Help

I am studying law and am confused with the first part of a certain question any help would be appreciated. It is:

Jimmy decided that the best way out of his crisis was to borrow heroin out of Mick's supply. Out of urgency he took the contents of three out of the last four bags in Mick's possesion and replaced it with caustic soda - a substance he knew would be lethal.

I am just wondering what topic this issue lies under..is it theft(appropriation)?

Thanks.

cath2000_01 Thurs 08/05/08 12:22

<< Previous

Next >>

Subscribe to question

Post an Answer

Josh111
Thurs 08/05/08
12:47

Hi,

Theft isn't the issue here. The heroin is already an illegal substance and Mick would not be able to pursue a matter in the courts. He would be saying, "Hey, he stole my heroine', which is also, "Hey, he stole an already illegal (and accordingly illegally acquired) from me!" The courts wouldn't be very sympathetic to this situation...

I don't want to give to much of an answer but think of the replacement of a substance which he KNOWS to be lethal...

Hope I've helped a little...

cath2000_01
Thurs 08/05/08
13:00

Question Author

Sorry i also forgot to mention it says : You are not required to discuss drugs offences.

Wonderous
Thurs 08/05/08
17:31

Don't worry about the drugs offences, as Josh says, concentrate on the knows to be lethal part. Think about what offences would/could be committed by Jimmy should the caustic soda be used instead of heroin and the effects it would have. Hope this helps

Stu Dent
Thurs 08/05/08
17:51

If you have a wee look through the contents page of a criminal law textbook, you will usually get a hint of what offences (or 'potential' offences) may have been committed.

Jimmy may know that the substance is lethal, but has he actually committed a crime by his actions? What is his intent? Consider 'recklessness'.

Supposing someone is injured or dies from Jimmy's actions. What charges could he face? What would be needed to secure a conviction (look at the actus reus and mens rea of the crimes you consider).

Defences: Suppose Mick (or another drug user) is injured or dies as a result of Jimmy's behaviour?
Would his state of mind be a relevant defence? If not, why not?

Hope this points you in the right direction without giving too much help.

Post an Answer

Submit the above question and answers

add to del.icio.us	add to digg	add to furl
add to reddit	add to Technorati	add to Blinklist
add to StumbleUpon	add to squidoo	add to ma.gnolia
add to Cocomment	add to Netscape	add to Fark

Most Recent

Most Recently Answered

All Unanswered

All Answered