Criminal Law and Practice — SQE1 practice questions

During an argument outside a nightclub, Aaron stabbed Ben in the abdomen. Ben was taken to hospital, where he was given a drug to which he was known to be allergic, owing to a negligent mistake by a junior doctor. Ben died two days later. Medical evidence shows that the stab wound remained serious and was still a significant cause of death, although the drug reaction contributed to it. Aaron is charged with murder.

Which of the following best describes whether Aaron caused Ben's death?

1. AAaron did not cause Ben's death, because negligent medical treatment always breaks the chain of causation.
2. BAaron did not cause Ben's death, because the stab wound was not the sole cause of death.
3. CAaron caused Ben's death only if he foresaw that Ben might receive negligent treatment.
4. DAaron caused Ben's death, because the stab wound remained an operating and significant cause and the treatment was not so independent and potent as to break the chain.
5. EAaron caused Ben's death, because a defendant must take his victim as he finds him.

Ross was staying overnight in his friend's flat. While reaching for his phone, he accidentally knocked over a lit candle, which set a curtain smouldering. Ross saw the smouldering curtain, realised that it might catch fire and spread, but decided not to do anything and left the flat to go to the pub. The fire spread and caused serious damage to the flat. Ross is charged with arson.

Which of the following best describes Ross's liability?

1. ARoss is liable, because having accidentally created a dangerous situation he came under a duty to take reasonable steps once he became aware of it, and he failed to act while aware of the risk.
2. BRoss is not liable, because there is no criminal liability for a failure to act.
3. CRoss is not liable, because he had no mens rea when he knocked the candle over and the mens rea must coincide with that act.
4. DRoss is liable only if he owed his friend a contractual duty to look after the flat.
5. ERoss is not liable, because the damage was to his friend's property rather than his own.

Pete and Quinn agreed to burgle a house at night while the owner was away. Pete knew Quinn was carrying a knife and thought there was a real possibility that Quinn might use it to cause serious harm if disturbed. The owner returned unexpectedly and Quinn stabbed him to death. Quinn is convicted of murder. Pete is charged with murder as an accessory.

Which of the following best describes the test for Pete's liability for murder?

1. APete is guilty of murder if he foresaw that Quinn might use the knife with intent to kill or cause serious harm.
2. BPete cannot be guilty of any homicide offence, because he did not stab the owner.
3. CPete is guilty of murder only if the jury is sure he intended to assist or encourage Quinn to act with intent to kill or cause serious harm; his foresight is evidence of that intention but not enough on its own.
4. DPete is guilty of murder only if he and Quinn expressly agreed beforehand that the knife would be used.
5. EPete is guilty of murder, because a participant in a joint enterprise is liable for every crime committed in the course of it.