• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

A person who genuinely attempts to commit a criminal offence and fails still deserves to be punished just as much as a person who succeeds in committing an offence

Extracts from this document...


A person who genuinely attempts to commit a criminal offence and fails still deserves to be punished just as much as a person who succeeds in committing an offence. The offence of attempt is the closest we get in the English legal system to satisfying the statement in question; however it is still the case that many defendants escape punishment because they didn't go far enough in attempting the crime, despite genuinely attempting to commit a criminal offence. In this essay I will analyse the existing law on attempts and conclude as to whether it is satisfactory. Attempt is an inchoate offence and is covered by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981. This act provides that "if with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence; he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence". The criminal law does not punish people for just intending to commit an offence; intent is a mental quality that implies a purpose, whereas attempt implies an effort to carry that purpose or intent into execution. An attempt goes beyond preliminary planning and involves a move towards the commission of the crime. The question as to where the defendant has gone before a merely preparatory act is unclear and open to differences in opinion. ...read more.


This role of sentencing will both benefit people who have committed an attempt or those with only the mens rea of the offence and have not gone far enough for the actions to be seen as more than preparatory. The question of whether an act is "more than merely preparatory" is a matter of fact and, in a trial on indictment, will be for the jury to decide. It seems that for some crimes, the defendant must go much further to completion of the act than for others and I believe that this needs clarifying in order to make the law fairer. For example Geddes, a man who was found in the boys' toilets equipped with a knife, tape and rope was found to have not committed attempted false imprisonment yet, R v Tosti and White who like Geddes were only found with the equipment needed to commit their crime of Burglary were found guilty. In committing an attempt the defendant has the mens rea for the complete offence and may be equally as dangerous. The academic Becker (1974) argues that whether an offence is actually committed or merely attempted, the same type of harm can be caused: disruption and social stability. One such example is in R v Gullefer where the defendant seeing that the dog that he had backed at the greyhound race was losing, jumped onto ...read more.


However, the House of Lords have since overruled their own decision in Shivpori where the defendant was arrested by customs officers and confessed that there was heroin in his luggage, however it was found that the substance was only vegetable leaves yet he was still convicted of an attempt. Now the only case in which impossibility can be a defence is if ther accused attempts to commit what they think is an offence, but which is actually not against the law such as in Taaffe. In conclusion I agree with the view in the question to a large extent. A person who genuinely attempts to commit a criminal offence and fails still deserves to be punished just as much as a person who succeeds in committing an offence. A defendant who has committed an attempt is still morally wrong and possibly just as dangerous as if they had managed to complete the offence. I believe that the current position of the law in England on the sentencing of attempts for most cases sufficient however there should be a clearer line drawn between what is preparatory and what the part of the crime. The offender should face the maximum sentence for the completed offence and a judge should decide based on the merits of the case, the sentence appropriate for that defendant. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Criminal Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Criminal Law essays

  1. Law - Unit 3 - Mock Exam Question

    Tort Law 2. a) To succeed in a negligence claim the claimant needs to successfully prove three things. Firstly, proof of duty. The claimant needs to prove to the court the defendant owed him a duty of care. Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) established the concept of a duty of care.

  2. AS level Criminal Paper

    reas has been established even though these affairs may not of come about through their own choice. This was held in case R v Larsohneur were by she was an alien on England soil contrary to the alien act. However this was involuntary the court held she was guilty.

  1. Should soft drugs like canabis be decriminalised?

    harmful like other class B drugs, it was reclassified as a class C drug on 29th of January 2004.

  2. Explain the meaning of Actus reus and mens rea

    The higher the risk then the more precautions you need to take and the lower the risk then less precautions are needed, thus in Bolton v Stone it was held that erecting a fence was an adequate precaution given that the cricket ball had only been hit out of the ground 6 times in 25 years.

  1. Sources of the English Legal System and the Relationship between Legislation and Judicial ...

    The court?s focuses more on the purpose of the statute and the intention of the legislature than the words before them. An example of a case that made use of the mischief rule is Elliott v Grey (1960), The Road Traffic Act 1930 stated it is a crime for an uninsured car to ?used on the road?.

  2. The regulations on arrest and detention of offenders under the Police and Criminal Act ...

    After the riots had been stopped, the old ?sus? laws were eventually repealed which was one of the predominant reasons to the introduction of PACE. Despite the introduction of PACE in order to reduce the growing tension between the police force and the public, to reinstate confidence within the police

  1. The History and Main Features of Criminal Law in the USA.

    In other words, no person will be forced to confess wrongdoing or say anything that might get them into trouble.The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution affords criminal defendants seven discrete personal liberties which are the right to a Speedy Trial; the right to a public trial; the right to

  2. Critically discuss the Labour Governments record of crime control since coming to power in ...

    The BCS is useful in relation to the Criminal Statistics by not only acting as a supplement by helping to remedy some of the gaps in official statistics, but also in providing a useful check as either a confirmation or modification of views derived from the Criminal Statistics.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work