Should soft drugs like canabis be decriminalised?

'SHOULD SOFT DRUGS SUCH AS CANNABIS BE DECRIMINALISED?' Cannabis is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United Kingdom. The unlawful possession of cannabis has increased and mostly among the young people of teenage. Recently, there has been much debate regarding the legalisation of cannabis for medical purposes1, but this would also increase the misuse of drugs among the ordinary people. An article in Telegraph newspaper reveals the figures of health authority showing the increased number of adults being treated by English hospital trusts after the abuse of cannabis. There were 11,057 in 2004-05 but it rose to 16,685 in 2006-2007 which is a clear evidence of the harmfulness caused by cannabis.2 Despite the legalisation, there is also an issue regarding the classification of cannabis. The main statutes governing the availability of drugs in the United Kingdom are the Medicines Act 1968 and the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.3 This essay will focus on the arguments concerning that should soft drugs such as cannabis be decriminalised or not. The controlled drugs are classified under A, B and C class depending on how harmful they are.4 The Misuse of Drugs Act was passed in 1971 which divided the drugs into these three categories and settled out the charges for possession or supply of the drugs according to each class. Class A drugs are the most dangerous having health risks and

  • Word count: 1411
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

The Crown Procecution Service

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was established under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 and started operating in 1986. Although the CPS Work closely with the Police it is an independent body responsible for prosecuting criminal cases. The CPS is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DDP). Across England and Wales the CPS has 42 areas which are divided into 15 regional groups. A Chief Crown Prosecutor (CCP) is responsible for prosecutions in each area. The main role of the CPS is to prosecute people charged with criminal offences provided the cases pass the evidential test and public interest test. The CPS also gives the police advice on matters related to their investigation of crime and deciding on what offence should be charged. They also review prosecutions started or referred to them by the police to ensure that the defendants are prosecuted on the right charges before the right court. Another responsibility of the CPS is to prepare cases for court and present cases in front of a court. Decisions to Prosecute are guided by the Code for Crown prosecutors which sets out the principles that Crown Prosecutors Should follow. Cases which are received by the Crown Prosecution Service are reviewed against two tests set out in the Code to determine whether to prosecute or not. The two tests are the evidential test and the

  • Word count: 937
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

The present law relating to Involuntary Manslaughter serves neither the defendant nor the criminal justice system. Discuss (50 marks)

Transfer-Encoding: chunked ‘The present law relating to involuntary MSL serves neither the defendant nor the criminal justice system’ Involuntary Manslaughter (MSL) is defined as an unlawful killing where the defendant (D) has no malice aforethought express or implied (to kill or cause GBH) which is required for murder. There are 3 ways of committing involuntary MSL: Unlawful Act MSL, Gross negligence MSL and reckless MSL. For D to be liable for unlawful (unl) act MSL D must commit an unl act which is dangerous and causes the victim’s (V)’s death. D must also intend to commit the unlawful act. An unl act is defined as a criminal offence. This is illustrated in the case of Franklin 1883) where D was acquitted after throwing a box into the sea which hit and killed a swimmer, as this was held to be a civil wrong which is not enough to create liability. This was also seen in Lamb (1967) where D shot his friend who didn’t think the gun would fire; this wasn’t assault as his friend feared no violence thus wasn’t an unl act. The unl act doesn’t have to be serious as seen in Larkin (1943) where the appellant waved a cut throat razor to scare another but instead scared V who fell onto it and died; D was convicted as this was deemed to be assault. The unl act also doesn’t have to be against a person; as seen in Newbury and Jones (1976) where two D’s threw a

  • Word count: 2267
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Discuss whether intoxication represents legal principle or public policy

Discuss whether intoxication represents legal principle or public policy Intoxication is split into voluntary intoxication and involuntary intoxication. Voluntary intoxication is where the defendant willingly consumes whatever causes the intoxication and involuntary is where they do not. Intoxication lowers a charge to the one below it so for murder they would instead get manslaughter One of the first cases that show Intoxication is the case of Lipman. This is where a man took LSD and ended up thinking his wife was a snake and strangled her. They got the defence of intoxication as they did not have the mens rea for the crime. This is good public policy as the public would not expect someone to be convicted of murder if they had no mens rea. Another case that is more the opposite of this in intoxication is the case of Kingston. This is where someone took coffee but it was spiked and they ended up committing a crime. They did not get the defence as the defendant already had the mens rea for the crime. Furthermore, the case of Gallagher also shows mens rea before intoxication as they drank for dutch courage to do the crime but did not get the defence as they had mens rea before the crime happened. This shows that intoxication clearly represents legal principle as the defendant without mens rea got the defence whilst the defendant with mens rea didn’t. Furthermore, the

  • Word count: 1474
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Recognition Of Necessity

Does English law recognize the defence of necessity? Necessity is accounted for in the English law as a general defence which can be integrated and is very closely associated with the duress of circumstance and lesser so the duress of threat. Firstly in reference to the duress of circumstance the defendant can be compelled to act in compulsion due to the circumstance he may find himself in and as shown in Northen Ireland v Lynch (1975) the duress of threat can be seen as a type of necessity in overall broadness. The defences labelled out above are all not available for murder or the attempt of murder (Source 3 lines 4-5) however can be for manslaughter due to the offence needing no mens rea to rid a body of a life. The defence of necessity has been recognised in many cases such as in F v West Berkshire Health Authority (1990) whereby a woman who lacked mental capacity had a sterilisation operation carried out due to the fact of a doctors thinking that there was high risk of her getting pregnant and it could cause psychiatric harm to the patient. The courts said that the doctors were indeed justified in carrying out the operation and in my opinion a general defence of necessity was further recognised. The integration of necessity into the duress of circumstance is of a wide substantial debate both by the courts and by parliament. The duress of circumstance is whereby

  • Word count: 1179
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Actus Reus and Mens Rea.

Connor McCann Unit 24 P1 + P2 So what is Actus Reus? Actus Reus is the conduct of the accused (The defendant). It can be an act of commission or act of omission, and it must be a voluntary act that causes the damage or harm. It can also be a "state of affairs". . Commission or act of Omission: A person may incur criminal liability for failing to do that which the law requires him to do as much as by doing that which the law prohibits. The actus reus includes the state of affairs or circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence, together with the results or consequences (if any) that flow from that act or omission. It is essential that the defendant acted voluntarily and that he caused the injury, damage or harm. In other words, actus reus includes all the elements of the offence indicated in the definition except the mens rea (the state of mind), if any. . Must be a voluntary act: Generally the accused's conduct must be a voluntary act or omission. The accused will not be held liable for acts done in a state of automatism. Automatism resulting from self-induced intoxication is no excuse. . The accused must cause the prohibited consequences: The crime must be caused by some conduct by the accused. That conduct need not be a direct cause of the crime, but can be through the agency of others. The conduct need not be the sole or the effective cause of the

  • Word count: 635
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Criminal Law

Criminal Law . Vincent, an Afro-Caribbean, was walking home when Kevin, a member of an extreme right-wing group, started shouting racist abuse. Kevin then attacked Vincent and pulled out a knife. Vincent suffered several deep cuts to his face and part of his ear was severed. a. Explain the terms actus reus and mens rea. Using those explanations, outline an appropriate offence with which Kevin might be charged. (15 marks) Actus reus means the guilty act, this is the physical element of a crime, this includes an act, failure to act [an omission]. An omission is when the defendant is under a legal duty to act in a certain way, this may include, a contractual/vocational duty [R v Pittwood], a relationship [R v Stone and Dobinson] or when the defendant creates a situation whereby a duty is imposed [R v Miller]. The courts will look at two issues when they are determining whether or not the defendant's actions caused the victims injury or death. Theses two issues are causation in law and causation in fact. Causation in law is when the defendant's actions are not the only cause for the injury or death but plays a part. The court's say the defendant makes a significant contribution [R v Smith]. Causation in fact is when the defendant's action causes the end result, this is judged by the 'but for' test, this basically means 'but for' the defendant's actions the victim would not

  • Word count: 762
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Is the current law on the non-fatal offences against the person satisfactory?

Reform of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person It has been recommended by many leading academic lawyers, including Professor Spencer, that the current legislation on non-fatal offences against the person be reformed to modernise and clarify the law. The Offences Against the Person Act 1861, under which the more serious offences of ABH, GBH and GBH with intent are charged, is one of the "workhorses" of the criminal law, and is responsible for approximately 80,000 cases a year; this strengthens the justification for improving the existing legislation through reform in order to make it more comprehensible. One of the main criticisms of the Act is that it is "outmoded" (Jack Straw), and much of the language is arcane and ambiguous. For example, before the case of Wilson v Pringle, it was unclear whether there was a requirement for hostility in the commission of a battery. Terms such as "occasioning" and "maliciously" are outdated and are in need of modernisation in order to make the law more accessible, particularly to laypeople. An additional complexity arises from the fact that the law is contained in a mixture of statute and case law. The Act itself was a consolidating statute that has been described as a "ragbag of offences" due to the lack of logical structure (for example, ABH is defined under section 47, whereas GBH and GBH with intent are defined under sections

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1698
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

police powers

Police Powers Questions Q1. Describe the powers of the police to stop and search on the street. And to conduct further searches at the police station. If you are stopped you'll first be asked where you're going and what you've been doing. The police may then decide to search you but only if they have a good reason, for example, that you fit the profile of a criminal seen in the area, or they think you're acting suspiciously. But it is not reasonable to stop and search on the basis of race, dress, or previous convictions. If subsequently you are searched it will take place on the street. If you are asked to remove more than your coat and gloves, or anything you wear for religious reasons, they must take you somewhere out of public view. The police can also search your vehicle. If you're carrying something illegal, such as a weapon, or the police believe you've committed a crime, you may be arrested. You don't have to give your name, address or date of birth to the police if you're stopped and searched unless you're being arrested. They can arrest anyone who is about to commit and offence, who is in the act of committing an offence, or whom he has reasonable ground of suspecting to be committing an offence. If you have been arrested, because you were caught committing an offence; or there is a warrant for your arrest, you will then be taken to a police station. Here you will

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 867
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Reform of the law on murder.The law commission say it is rickety structure set on shaky foundations and is in dire need of reform. The whole offence as an overview is complex, unclear, uncertain and unfair.

Reform of Murder Murder is a common law offence which is interpreted by the courts. The current common law offence was defined by coke in the 17th century and still exists today. It also doesn't allow for any differentiation between different kinds of killing. Which now, there are many different types of killings such as serial killings, euthanasia, mercy killings etc and therefore the law should adapt to support this. The law commission say it is "rickety structure set on shaky foundations" and is "in dire need of reform". The whole offence as an overview is complex, unclear, uncertain and unfair. In regards to the actus reus, there are some problems with many aspects including cokes definition of "unlawful killing of a human being". First, for the term "human being", it is a bit confusing into what counts as life, and what counts as death in regards to murder. The term "life" is defined in AG ref (NO3 1994) as being from when you are born and breathing independently from the mother. However, for death there is no legal definition, only a medical one of "brain stem" death Malcherek and steel. It doesn't seem to make sense that there is a legal definition for life but not for death, there should be a legal definition for both. In regards to "unlawful killing", this is an issue of causation. There are different opinions on the way self neglect such as in the case Dear

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1196
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay