Write an essay that shows understanding of the relevant areas of the criminal law as well as demonstrating skills of analysis, evaluation and making a reasoned argument.

Dishonesty Test Evaluation

EMA
End-of-module assignment (EMA)

The cut-off date for this EMA is 12:00 (UK local time) 3 June 2021. This is the latest date by which your EMAmust reach your tutor. To see how this fits in with your study of the module overall, see your study planner. Youmust submit your EMA using the online TMA/EMA service.Before attempting to answer this EMA you should review the separate EMA guidance, which contains informationabout a number of resources to help you complete this EMA.The EMA is worth 40% of your overall score for the module.

For more information on module assessment see the Section 5.3 of the Module Guide.This EMA consists of two questions, each worth 50 marks. You should answer both questions. Your answershould be written in your own words.The word limit for this EMA is a maximum of 3000 words. You should use up to 1500 words for Question 1 and upto 1500 words for Question 2. Remember that all the words you use to answer the question, including quotationsand citations, count.

You must provide a reference list and your word count at the end of your work. The reference list is not included inthe word count.

For advice on referencing, and the reference list that you must produce and include at the end of your work, seeSection 6 of the OU Law School Undergraduate Assessment Guide. You should read the relevant sections of thisguide before attempting the EMA.Before you start work on your EMA, read Guidance on writing your assignment, including especially ‘Applicationof assessment guidance’.

Question 1

You should use up to 1500 words for answering this question.

 

Read the scenario and answer the problem question that follows.It is Saturday afternoon and Jennie needs money quickly in order to pay the latest monthly instalment of acar loan, due on Monday. If she does not pay this month, Jennie is worried the car will be re-possessed andshe will not be able to travel to work to earn money to pay her rent and feed her family. Jennie’s brotherJasper calls to ask Jennie if she will babysit Jasper’s young children that evening so he and his partner Rileycan go out for a date night.

On Saturday evening Jennie is babysitting at Jasper’s house, while Jasper and Riley are out. The childrenare asleep in bed and Jennie is pacing around the lounge worrying about her financial position when shesees £200 in notes underneath a clock on a high bookshelf. That would be enough for Jennie to make her car repayment. Jennie thinks that her brother may be willing to give her the £200 given her circumstances,but is not sure because she has previously borrowed money from him and failed to pay it back as agreed.Acting rashly, Jennie decides she cannot risk asking Jasper and pockets the £200. She is sure he willdiscover the money missing and resolves to tell him about it later on. When Jasper and Riley return homelater that evening, Jennie quickly leaves without mentioning the money.

She uses the money to pay her loan instalment on Monday morning. Jennie worries all week about Jasper finding out about the missing money,but with each passing day her resolve to come clean grows weaker and eventually she thinks she may havegotten away with it and decides not to mention it.Jasper does not realise that the money is missing until the following weekend, when he is dusting thebookshelf. He cannot think where the money, which he has set aside to buy Riley a birthday present, canhave gone and thinks he must have moved it somewhere else.As Riley’s birthday approaches, Jasper grows increasingly agitated about the missing money. He has looked everywhere and cannot find it, and is worried that without it Riley will be disappointed that he has not givenher a nice present.

This makes him quite stressed and short-tempered. The evening before Riley’s birthday,Jasper is quite upset and goes for a drink in the pub. He sits on a stool at the bar and has two glasses oflemonade. At around 10 pm another man, Pablo, enters the pub, buys a drink, sits next to Jasper and startsasking him lots of questions about why he looks so worried and why he is drinking alone.At first Jasper tries to be polite but he soon becomes annoyed. Jasper suddenly shouts ‘will you stopbothering me’, turns abruptly towards Pablo and stands up. In the process, Jasper accidentally knocksPablo’s drink into his lap.

Infuriated, Pablo quickly squares up to Jasper and shoves him hard in the chest,stepping forward as he does so. Jasper reels backwards and, in doing so, collides with Akma’s back as sheis about to take a drink. The impact forces Akma’s glass against her mouth, causing her to have a swollen lip.Fearing Pablo is going to punch him, Jasper picks up an empty glass from the bar and smashes it overPablo’s forehead, causing a large cut over his right eye. At that moment, some of the bar staff intervene to break up the pair, and the pub landlord calls the police, who arrive on the scene shortly afterwards and arrestJasper and Pablo.

Advise Jennie, Jasper and Pablo of their likely criminal liability for any offences, including anydefences they may have.
You are instructed to advise three people in respect of their possible criminal liability. When answering thisquestion you should:use the IRAC method for answering law problem questions as set out in Box 2 of the OU Law SchoolUndergraduate

Assessment Guide

carry out some of your own research on the applicable law to support your answer; however, you are notrequired to consider offences or defences you have not studied on the W203 module unitsstructure your answer correctly as a problem answer and advise each relevant person separately, in turnexamine all of the elements that need to be proven for any criminal offences you think are relevant to theparties you are asked to advisestate the law in relation to these elements and apply it to the facts in the scenario, identifying which factshelp to prove that each element has or has not been fulfilledreach a conclusion as to the likely liability of the parties you are asked to advise, based on your analysis ofthe relevant offences and defences.(50 marks)

Note: before you complete this EMA you should read Guidance on writing your assignment.

Question 2

You should use up to 1500 words for answering this question.Answer the following question in the style of an essay.The Ivey test … gives a wider scope for conviction than Ghosh, and allows a conviction based on ashortfall in conduct and in the absence of culpability.

(Bailie, C. (2020) ‘Oh Ghosh – Comment on R v Barton and Booth [2020] EWCA Crim 575’, 2 Bedford Row, April [Blog].Available at https://www.2bedfordrow.co.uk/oh-ghosh-comment-on-r-v-barton-and-booth-2020-ewca-crim-575-by-conall-bailie/ (Accessed 1 July 2020))

Evaluate the impact of the decisions in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd. trading as Crockfords [2017]UKSC 67 and Booth & Anor v R [2020] EWCA Crim 575 on the criminal law test for dishonesty. Do youthink the law in this area is now satisfactory?

You should carry out some of your own independent research into the relevant law to answer this question, usingthe OU Library.

This essay question requires you to:concisely explain the test for dishonesty in the criminal law and the legal implications of the Ivey and Booth cases analyse how the cases modify the test for dishonestyevaluate the merits of the relevant law following Ivey and Booth in relation to the pre-existing legal positionthroughout the entire essay, develop a reasoned argument about whether you think the criminal lawdishonesty test is now satisfactory.(50 marks)

Note: before you complete this EMA you should read Guidance on writing your assignment.

Learning outcomes
The EMA tests the following learning outcomes.

Knowledge:

explaining the law relating to offences against the person, theft and applicable defences.

Skills:

conduct independent research and use the findings analyse and apply legal authority in a logical and coherent way to advise named individualsevaluate the law to present a reasoned argumentpresent answers clearly and concisely in an appropriate form, using correct referencing.

Question 1

This question requires you to find and read a case, conduct your own independent research, and answer aproblem question based on the scenario provided, using the IRAC method. You should advise three namedparties as to their likely criminal liability, based on the analysis and application to the facts of the elements ofrelevant criminal offences.T

he recommended word limit for Question 1 is 1500 words, and you should allocate your words carefully between the people you are asked to advise to ensure that you have covered all of the relevant issues for each.

You will need to show that you are able to structure an answer properly using the IRAC method, identify relevantlegal issues arising from a set of facts, accurately state the appropriate law with reference to authority, and applythe law to specific facts to reach well-reasoned conclusions.

You should supplement your answer to the question with your own research into the relevant law to develop youranswer, using the OU library.For further advice on how to approach this question see the separate EMA guidance.

Question 2

This question requires you to conduct your own independent research in order to answer an essay question aboutthe law relating to dishonesty in relation to property-related criminal offences.

You are required to write an essay that shows understanding of the relevant areas of the criminal law as well asdemonstrating skills of analysis, evaluation and making a reasoned argument.

Last Completed Projects