Short Answer Questions

Question 1

Section 152 - Duty of a parent or guardian

Answer 1

Everyone who is a parent or person in place of a parent, who has actual care of charge of a child under the age of 18 is under a legal duty to:

• Provide that child with the necessities and
• Take reasonable step ot protect that child from injury

Question 2

Section 154 - Abandoning a child under 6

Answer 2

Everyone is liable to imprisonment not exceeding 7 years

• Unlawfully
• Abandons or exposes
• Any child under age of 6

Question 3

Outline the culpability for children under 10 and children 10 - 13 years old

Answer 3

Under 10:
- A child under 10 has an absolute defence to any charge brought again them. Nevertheless, even though a child cannot be convicted, you still have to establish whether or not they are guilty.

Child 10 - 13:
- For children 10 - 13 inclusive, it must be shown that the child knew that their act was wrong or contrary to the law. This is in addition to the mens rea and actus reus requirement.

• If this knowledge cannot be shown, the child cannot be held criminally liable for the offence.

Question 4

Outline M’Naghten rules (Insanity):

Answer 4

The M’Naghten rules are frequently used to establish whether or not the Defendant is insane. It is based on the persons’s ability to think rationally so that if a person is insane they were acting under such a defect of a reason from a disease pf the mind that they did not know:

• The nature and quality of their actions OR
• That what they were doing was wrong

Question 5

What is sane and insane automatism?

Answer 5

Automatism may be quite different and distinct from insanity, although it may be due to disease of the mind. Hence it is necessary to distinguish the difference between:

• Sane automatism - the result of somnambulism (sleepwalking), a blow to the head or effects of drugs
• Insane automatism - The result of mental disease.

Question 6

How NZ courts deal with a defence of automatism arising out of taking alcohol and /or drugs:

Answer 6

New Zealand has adopted the principle that self-induced intoxication can lead to a defence of automatism if the evidence is sufficiently strong to support the defence.

In New Zealand, the courts are likely to steer a middle course, allowing a defence of automatism arising out of taking alcohol and drugs, to offences of basic intent only. They are likely to disallow the defence where the state of mind is obviously self induce, the person is blameworthy, and the consequences could have been expected.

Question 7

Outline general rules regarding intoxication defence.

Answer 7

• Where intoxication causes the disease of the mind so as to bring S23 CA61 into effect
• If intent is required as an essential element of the offence and the drunkenness is such that the defence can plead a lack of intent to commit the offence
• Where the intoxication causes a state of automatism (complete acquittal)

Question 8

What three points must be satisfied before the defence of compulsion can be used?

Answer 8

• The defendant was confronted by an immediate threat of death/GBH by a person present at the time
• The defendant must have genuinely believed the threat AND
• The defendant must not be party to any association or conspiracy involved in carrying out the threats.

Question 9

Degree of force permitted for self-defence under what subjective criteria?

Answer 9

• What are the circumstances that the defendant genuinely believes exist? (Whether or not mistaken)
• Do you accept that the defendant genuinely believes those facts
• Is the force used reasonable in the circumstances believed to exist?

Question 10

Circumstances where culpable homicide have been supported in criminal law:

Answer 10

• Committing arson
• Giving a child excessive amounts of alcohol to drink
• Placing hot cinders and straw on a drunk person to frighten them
• Supplying heroin to the deceased
• Throwing concrete from a motorway bridge into an approaching car
• Conducting an illegal abortion

Question 11

If the Defendant intends to call an expert witness during proceedings, what must they disclose to the prosecution?

Answer 11

• Any brief of evidence to be given or any report provided by that witness OR
• If that brief or any such report is not available, a summary of the evidence to be given and the conclusions of any report are to be provided.
• This information must be disclosed at least 14 days before the date fixed for the Defendant hearing or trial, or within a further time that the court may alow under section 23(1).

Question 12

When does a child become a human under S159(1) & 159(2) (Killing of a child) and therefore able to be murdered under S158(Homicide defined)?

Answer 12

159(1) A child becomes a human being with the meaning of this act when it has completely proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother, whether it has breathed or not, whether it has an independent circulation or not, and whether the navel string is severed or not.

159(2)The killing of such a child is homicide, if it dies in consequences of injuries received before, during or after birth.

Question 13

To establish proof of death in relation to homicide you must prove three key elements:

Answer 13

• Death occurred
• Deceased is identified as the person who has been killed
• The killing is culpable
• Death can be proved by direct and/or circumstantial evidence

Question 14

Outline the ingrediences for infanticide S178 - 3 years imprisonment

Answer 14

• Where a woamn causes the death of any child of hers under 10 years old in a manner that amounts to culpable homicide and
• Where at the time of the offence the balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of;

a) her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to that or any other child OR
b) the effect of lactation OR
c) Any disorder consequent upon childbirth or lactation

• To such an extent that she could not be held fully responsible
• She is guilty of infanticide and not murder or manslaughter

Question 15

Hearsay statemant is admissible in any proceeding if;

Answer 15

The circumstances relating to the statement provide reasonable assurance that the statement is reliable and either:

• The maker of the statement is unavailable as a witness OR
• The judge considers that undue expense and delay would be caused if the maker of the statement were required to be a witness

Question 16

What can you do with a child under 10 who has committed a serious sexual offence?

Answer 16

Refer to OT as unable to convict a person who has committed a crime under 10 years old.

Question 17

You cannot use the defence of consent to assault in the following cases

Answer 17

• AIding suicide
• criminal actions
• Injury like to cause death
• Bodily harm likely to cause a breach of the peace
• Indecency offences
• The placing of someone in a situation where they are at risk of death or bodily harm

Question 18

Can an organisation be convicted of murder or manslaughter?

Answer 18

No, because the killing must be done by a human being, an organisation cannot be convicted as a principal offender.

Question 19

Admissibility of hearsay statements S18(1) EA 06:

Answer 19

(1) a hearsay statement is admissible in any proceeding if -
(a) the circumstances relating to the statement provide reasonable assurance that the statement is reliable; and
(b) either (i) the maker of the statement is unavailable as a witness; or
(ii) the judge consider that undue expense or delay would because if the maker of the statement were required as a witness.

Question 20

Killing in a sudden fight; what must you consider?

Answer 20

• Whether there was self-defence
• Whether there was a requisite mens rea for the murder charge
• if the homicide can be justified as having arisen out of self-defence (s48) the proper verdict is an acquittal
• If the fact there was a fight negates that the defendant had the required mens rea to bring a charge of murder within section 167, the proper verdict is manslaughter

Question 21

The Defendants culpability when a person dies following the withdrawal from life support?

Answer 21

• When a person deliberately injures another person and the person dies as a result of treatment of those injuries, the person who inflicted the intal injuries is responsible for person death. The degree of liabilities relies on the element of mens rea.
• When treatment is sought for an injury and the injured person dies, the person what originally injury is liable for the death, even if the person died as a result of improper treatment, so long as the treatment was done in good faith.
• Liability for medical practitioners must be considered.
• In R V TAREI “the withdrawal of any form of life support system is not “treatment” under s166 CA61. To withdraw life support does not cause death but removes the possibility of extending the persons life through artificial means.

Question 22

A day and a year Section 162

Answer 22

Death must be within a year and a day
(1) No one is criminally responsible for the killing of another unless the death takes place within a year and a day after the cause of death

(2) The period of a year and a day shall be reckoned inclusive of the day on which the last unlawful act contributing to the cause of death took place
(3) Where the cause of death is an omission to fulfil a legal duty, the period shall be reckoned inclusive of the day on which such omission ceased.
(4) Where death is in part cause by an unlawful act and in part by an omission, the period shall be reckoned inclusive of the day on which the last unlawful act took place or the omission ceased, whichever happened last.