Self-defense and Criminal Law Quiz
40 Questions
3 Views

Choose a study mode

Play Quiz
Study Flashcards
Spaced Repetition
Chat to lesson

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What is the legal principle that holds a person responsible for an offence even if they did not commit the act itself?

  • Principal Responsibility
  • Concursus Delinquentium (correct)
  • Common Design
  • Independent Liability

    • Accomplices are punished differently than the principal criminal regardless of their level of participation.

    False

    What does Article 43 state regarding accomplices?

    Accomplices are liable to the same punishment as the principal.

    Each party to an offence is liable to punishment in proportion to his individual _____ .

    <p>guilt</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following terms with their definitions:

    <p>Accomplice = Someone who assists in the commission of a crime Principal = The main individual who commits the crime Common Design = A shared intent to commit an offence Individual Guilt = Responsibility based on one's level of participation in a crime</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In what case was common design confirmed as an essential element of complicity?

    <p>Il pulizija vs Carmelo Agius</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The degree of guilt of individuals involved in a crime can vary based on the circumstances of the offence.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must an individual do to be considered to have concurred in an offence?

    <p>Intend the offence and do something towards its commission.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What happens if someone decides to abandon a criminal plan before any steps towards committing the crime are taken?

    <p>Their repentance benefits others who aided them.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    If a principal offender decides to stop after beginning their actions that constitute an attempt, their accomplices are automatically exempt from liability.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is Carrara's view on the liability of accomplices when the principal offender repents after an attempt?

    <p>Accomplices should still be punished because they were involved in the criminal act.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    If a man commands another to commit an offence but later changes his mind, he remains _____ if the change was not communicated in time.

    <p>co-responsible</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In situations where the principal has attempted to commit a crime but later repents, what do some legal writers believe?

    <p>The decision to stop should benefit the accomplices.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Repentance of an accomplice before the commission of an offence absolves them from all responsibilities.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    According to the discussion of liability, what remains unchanged if the accomplice's change of mind isn't communicated in time?

    <p>The accomplice's liability remains unchanged.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the concepts related to desistance and complicity with their descriptions:

    <p>Desistance before crime = Benefits other accomplices Principal offender's repentance = May not absolve accomplices Countermanding an order = Remains co-responsible if not communicated Accomplice's repentance = Does not change complicity effects</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Under what condition does the crime of conspiracy exist?

    <p>When two or more people agree on a plan of action</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The crime of conspiracy cannot be committed if the offenders voluntarily abandon their plan.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What happens if the conspirators agree on a plan but it is subjected to a condition beyond their control?

    <p>The crime of conspiracy is still considered complete.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The addition our law makes to the requirements of English law creates a heavier _________ of proof on the prosecution.

    <p>onus</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What case confirmed that conspiracy is a formal offense regardless of the desired outcome?

    <p>Steve John Caddick</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Voluntary desistance can occur after conspiracy has been established without legal implications.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What constitutes the commencement of a substantive offense in the context of conspiracy?

    <p>The plan must be complete.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following terms with their definitions:

    <p>Conspiracy = Agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime Voluntary desistance = Choice to abandon a plan before it is executed Onus of proof = Burden placed on the prosecution to prove guilt Substantive offense = The actual crime that is intended to be committed</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must be proven for a self-defense claim to be valid?

    <p>The threat was unjust, grave, and inevitable.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Shooting an intruder without additional factors is justified self-defense.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Under what circumstances is a threat deemed 'grave'?

    <p>When it threatens life, body, or chastity of an individual.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    A threat is considered _______ if it is unlawful.

    <p>unjust</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following exemplifies a situation where self-defense may not be justified?

    <p>When someone is merely blocking an exit.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What characterizes a legitimate defense according to the law?

    <p>Direct aggression or violence from the attacker.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What type of harm or evil does a 'grave' threat specifically refer to?

    <p>Irreparable harm, particularly to life or personal safety.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the term with its definition:

    <p>Unjust = Unlawful threat Grave = Irreparable harm Inevitable = Certain to happen Reasonable apprehension = Fear based on realistic threats</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is sufficient to charge someone with conspiracy?

    <p>A mere agreement to commit a crime</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Further planning beyond the initial agreement is necessary to be found guilty of conspiracy.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the case mentioned, what type of evidence was used to prove conspiracy?

    <p>Confession</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Conspiracy is considered a __________ crime that is independent of other crimes.

    <p>standalone</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following statements about conspiracy is true?

    <p>Conspiracy can be charged alongside attempts or completed crimes.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following terms with their descriptions:

    <p>Conspiracy = An agreement to commit a crime Attempt = Commencing the execution of a crime Completion = Final act leading to criminal charge Confession = Admission of guilt regarding conspiracy</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Direct evidence is usually available to prove conspiracy.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The __________ crime of conspiracy can exist even if the intended crime is not executed.

    <p>inchoate</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Study Notes

    Intruder and Self-defense

    • Nighttime intrusions elevate fear and urgency, impacting a person's response.
    • Laws surrounding self-defense hinge on actual necessity and the presence of threats or violence.
    • Shooting an intruder solely for being one is unjustified; theft must be coupled with aggression or violence.
    • Justification for defense occurs when an intruder not only steals but also instills fear through violent behavior.

    Conditions for Legitimate Defense

    • Justification for acting in self-defense includes the threat being unjust, grave, and inevitable.
    • Unjust: Threat must be unlawful; lawful commands from authorities (like police) negate this requirement.
    • Grave: Threat of irreversible harm should be serious, endangering life or bodily integrity; mere property interference does not justify harm.

    Complicity in Criminal Actions

    • Complicity involves multiple individuals being punished for their separate roles in a crime.
    • Accomplices face equal punishment, but each is accountable for individual actions related to the offense.
    • The degree of guilt varies among participants, assessed independently based on their involvement.
    • Concursus delinquentium indicates one can be held responsible for an offense even if not the principal actor, if they helped further the common goal.
    • Each party involved in an offense is punishable based on their individual guilt, rather than their role.
    • All accomplices are liable for actions taken towards committing the crime, reinforcing the significance of the common design.

    Repentance and Liability

    • A person who incites or aids in a crime but abandons it may see a reduction in liability if no crime occurs.
    • If a principal offender repents after starting an attempted crime, opinions diverge on whether accomplices should be exempt from punishment.
    • Some legal perspectives assert that accomplices remain liable even if the principal changes their mind post-attempt.

    Conspiracy and Planning

    • Conspirators who abandon plans while preparatory acts are ongoing still carry guilt for the period prior to desistance.
    • A completed conspiracy exists once there’s any mutual agreement on how to execute a criminal act, regardless of whether the act is actually performed.
    • Under law, conspiracy is established through mere planning; no further actions are needed beyond this agreement to be guilty of conspiracy.
    • Individuals can be charged with conspiracy alongside attempts or completion of the actual crime due to the independent nature of conspiracy as an offense.
    • Proving conspiracy often relies on indirect evidence, requiring an assessment of actions suggesting unlawful collaboration.
    • Confessions can serve as proof of conspiracy, as demonstrated in specific legal cases, illustrating the complexities law enforcement faces when dealing with conspiratorial actions.

    Studying That Suits You

    Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

    Quiz Team

    Related Documents

    STUDY CRIMINAL FILLETTI.docx

    Description

    Test your knowledge on the principles of self-defense and criminal complicity. This quiz covers legal concepts regarding legitimate defense, the necessity of threats, and the roles of accomplices in crimes. Challenge your understanding of these crucial legal frameworks.

    More Like This

    Use Quizgecko on...
    Browser
    Open
    Browser
    Browser