Hi Elena, watching your new video in the other channel I remembered about these ones and I just want to say: take your time, all you need. Because it is pretty clear this is your pathway. Doesn't matter if it is in Cambridge or in another place. What I see here is a person who loves law and such motivation and determination will make you pursue your dream, no matter when. Take care
Quick question: Didn’t R v Dudley and Stephens find that necessity can’t be used as a murder defense? Maybe I’m wrong or it applies differently to secondary liability?
@7:21 I have to challenge you on that, I don’t agree that it is “unfair”. So ... take for example- an “accomplice” D2 Intends to kill/cause GBH to a person but does not want to face the consequences, therefore employing/recruiting D1 to commit the crime on his behalf. D2 is just as guilty as D1 as D2 satisfies the Mens Rea element “guilty mind” minus any defences = Liable. (Homicide are Strict Liability crimes) D2 is responsible for the result as it was Orchestrated by himself. See “But for” - if D2 did not instruct D1, the event would never have occurred, given the Victim’s circumstances. Nonetheless, gd video on the Jogee case 👍🏽
Yeah it's true but D2 is the only criminal here because he committed the crime as just say that Johnny did a crime and as in court he could also say George too is a criminal but how court know this? Maybee Johnny is giving false assertion so if a proof like record of telephone conversation or any footage or any other thing which proves that George has a role then only court can punish him until not
![일상 속 기분 좋음 [Proto disco meme]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DwmEIaZ7XGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
watching this 2 days before my exam where we WILL have to write an essay on this. Great brief on the development of Complicity
why is this video soo underrated? ❤️ this is really helpful, thank you!
Hi Elena, watching your new video in the other channel I remembered about these ones and I just want to say: take your time, all you need. Because it is pretty clear this is your pathway. Doesn't matter if it is in Cambridge or in another place. What I see here is a person who loves law and such motivation and determination will make you pursue your dream, no matter when. Take care
Thank you so much! I know it's been a while since you wrote this but I only just now logged back into this account and read your lovely comment
Thanks a lot help me in my exam studies
Was checking for other videos only to far you have very few
Well explained.
fascinating!! thank you :)
Quick question: Didn’t R v Dudley and Stephens find that necessity can’t be used as a murder defense? Maybe I’m wrong or it applies differently to secondary liability?
The more recent case of Re A [2001] allowed the defence of necessity for the offence murder, but it was a rare case with specific circumstances.
Hii Elena i am a Public Prosecutor in Maharashtra State,India.
Appear for state govt in criminal matters...
@7:21 I have to challenge you on that, I don’t agree that it is “unfair”. So ... take for example- an “accomplice” D2 Intends to kill/cause GBH to a person but does not want to face the consequences, therefore employing/recruiting D1 to commit the crime on his behalf. D2 is just as guilty as D1 as D2 satisfies the Mens Rea element “guilty mind” minus any defences = Liable. (Homicide are Strict Liability crimes) D2 is responsible for the result as it was Orchestrated by himself. See “But for” - if D2 did not instruct D1, the event would never have occurred, given the Victim’s circumstances. Nonetheless, gd video on the Jogee case 👍🏽
Yeah it's true but D2 is the only criminal here because he committed the crime as just say that Johnny did a crime and as in court he could also say George too is a criminal but how court know this?
Maybee Johnny is giving false assertion so if a proof like record of telephone conversation or any footage or any other thing which proves that George has a role then only court can punish him until not
But as D2 or Johnny in the case has committed the crime so he is ofcourse a criminal according to law but for D1 evidence is required to say anything
This is my perspective may be i could asserted wrong.