This is a problematic question it should be dealt like problematic question instead of easy style.
all reference and cases should be from UK law and UK courts.
Contents
Issue. 2
Law.. 2
Application. 4
Conclusion. 4
References. 7
Issue
Andy and Tim are environmentalists. But they always cause problems. For this reason they are called troublemakers. Now Andy and Tim forced the manager of Shamrock’s Cafe for purchasing of fair trade coffee bean. But the manager Jed has refused to buy this. After that, Andy and Tim wanted to damage the Shamrock’s Cafe. For that Andy and Tim disturbed the manager of Shamrock’s Cafe continuously.Andy writes a message with threatening to the Manager and after that Tim make a call to the manager and says to close the Shamrock’s Cafe (Yin, Yousif and Mraz, 2000). In this case, a couple goes to the Shamrock’s Cafe. They are being tortured by Andy. Andy was swinging an axe on Nora’s head but this did not touch the head of Nora. After that Andy tries to injure the Oisin. Nora is injured by Andyand after that Oisin is injured by the Andy. Andy runs away from this place and hide in the nearest shopping centre. At this time Tim through the petrol filled cartons to the Shamrock’s Cafe and the cafe is burned. The result is that Shamrock’s Cafe is badly damaged. A citizen whose name is Patti has observed this situation and catch up Andy from the nearest shopping centre. After that Andy is injured by the Patti. Patti is cutting Andy’s face with her ring (Orr, 2010)
So this is the case study and now we will discuss about the Criminal Law Act of United Kingdom. (Fitzpatrick, 2006)
Law
The criminal law mainly conducts the society and it regulates any harmful situation.Under this criminal law, who is involved with any crime they are punishable by the government. There are different types of criminal law. Those are act of guilty, mind of guilty, liability of strict, killing with unlawfully, offences which is personal, entry unlawfully to another’s real property, involvement partially with crime (Simester, 2005). Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997 the attempting murder is the very offence as per Parliamentary Act of United Kingdom. Mainly it is created by the England and Wales.
Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 18 is for any person, who harasses another person without any cause. Any person who creates any harmful activity to another person this is guilty for offence. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 18, any harmful activity to body or mind with pain is called harm.
Now we will discuss about the Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 18, section 20, and section 28, this discuss about Non-Fatal Act 1997.The objectives of criminal law are discussed now. As per Criminal Law 1967, criminal law imposes to accept the five objectives and those are punishment, nemesis, security, disqualify, recover, makeover. If in any case, any individual is involved with any crime then he or she will be penalised as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. The second objective is that nemesis or retribution is reasonable for any criminal. Disability or incapacitation or disqualification is another objective to protect the crime. After that makeover or restoration is another part which has to be followed as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. (Oksanen and Välimäki, 2007)
According to the Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 28, various sections are included in the criminal law. At first, any sexual harassment or false imprisonment or any harmful activity is serious offence. Non-Fatal Act 1997, Felony or Misdemeanour is almost same. Under this act, the subject of destruction of any criminal are penalised for trial of murder or trial of any other offence (Coghlan, 2012). The subject of provision of Non-Fatal Act 1997, without warrant of arrest is possible in some cases and those are discussed now. Under the criminal law 1967 sec 2 (1), if any individual imposes offence or attempt to promise offence then this person is criminal as per law. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997any reasonable cause or if any individual is suspected by law then the individual is arrested as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. (Bouza, 2001)
Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997if any individual is arrested for being guilty by committing anyoffence, or if any individual is suspected by law or if any individual is promised to do any offence then this individual is arrested on the basis of Non-Fatal Act 1997. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997 the constable may arrest the person if proper cause is present against this person. Besides that, without warrant constable can arrest the individual if he is suspected or if he has committed anyoffence. As per provision of Non-Fatal Act 1997, any individual is arrested by the force to stop the crime. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, if any person knows the offenders or criminals then he should be penalised.
Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, a person is arrested for any false information. Besides that, if any individual knows about the crime or criminal or give false information then the individual should be arrested. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, for any serious crime the criminal is criticized by the lawyer for trial of offence (Fortson, 2008). For this offence the criminal can request to urgent plea. Besides that a formal charge is made by the murderer if he was not guilty about the murder. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, for any criminal if imprisonment is prepared by the court law for life time then the person is liable for two years. Under the Criminal Law 1967, night walker, barrater or challenging to fight is included in the obsolete crimes Part 2. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, the contract of public policy is an offence as per supplementary. (West and Greenall, 2011)
As per section Non-Fatal Act 1997, when preliminary offence is created by the person then the person is guilty of attempting offence. As per Non-Fatal Act 1997, when the offence is impossible then this offence is situated under this act. As per section Non-Fatal Act 1997, when any offence is created by any mistake then this offence is situated under this act. As per Non-Fatal Act 1997, this rules state with when time limit is mentioned for arrest the person then this rule is situated under this act as per parliament (Time Limit, 2002).As per Non-Fatal Act 1997, in general penalties are created when attempting of murder is happened.
Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, if any individual is accused forany misbehave or insulting behaviour will be penalised by the law of court. As per public order 1986, Riot, Violent Disorder, Affray is covered by this public offer standard. UnderNon-Fatal Act 1997, any threatening, or insulting words are considered to be offence as per public order. Under Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 20, any threatening, or insulting words or any disordering behaviour are also considered as offence as per public order (Mooney and Daffern, 2013). Under Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 20, any threatening, or insulting words and causing harassment are regarded as the offence as per public order. (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2006)
Application
From this case study,it can be decide that Andy and Tim are guilty for offence as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. This is because Andy and Tim did offensive work for the Shamrock’s cafe and the manager of this cafe. According to the Non-Fatal Act 1997, that the law mainly conducts the society and it regulates any harmful situation. Here, Andy and Tim create harmful situation. For this Andy and Tim are arrested under Non-Fatal Act 1997.Under this criminal law, who is involved with any crime they are punishable by the government. There are different types of criminal law. Those are act of guilty, mind of guilty, liability of strict, killing with unlawfully, offences which is personal, entry unlawfully to another’s real property, involvement partially with crime. This case study of Shamrock’s cafe is related with offences of participatory as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. (Pelham and Browne, 2011)
According to the Non-Fatal Act 1997, this case is related with Section 20, section 18, section 28. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, Andy who is an environmentalist is arrested by the court of law. It has been stated byNon-Fatal Act 1997 thatperson is penalised for the above mentioned offensive activity. Here, in this case Oisin and Nora are injured by the Andy. There have reasonable excuses which are discussed above. At first Andy forced the manager of cafe for purchasing the fair trade coffee bean (LIGHTSTONE, 2010). The manager refused this and for this reason Andy threaded the manager by making call and message. So thisoffence can lead to arrest. After that, Andy fights with the customer of the cafe. First Andy was swinging an axe on Nora’s head but he thought that this cannot touch the head of Nora. After that Andy tries to injure the Oisin. Then Andy runs away from there. But Patti observed this and after that Patti is cutting his face with her ring. For Nora’s injury, Andy is arrested under the Non-Fatal Offences 1997, section 28.AndNora claims against Andy for false imprisonment. Under the Non -Fatal Offences 1997, section 20 the manager Jed of the Shamrock’s Cafe also claims against Andy and Tim for taking unlawful act. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, any destroying or injuring records which is belongs to the law of court or equity is offensive as per criminal law act. So under this act Andy and Tim should be penalised by the law of court as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. Besides that Nora and Oisin can claim against Andy and Tim for attempting murder as per Non-Fatal Act 1997.
Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 20 is applicable for Andy who misbehaves with manager of Shamrock’s Cafe and Nora and Oisin. Under this act any misbehaviour or threatening is declared as harassment to the public. Besides that, as per Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 28, when any sexual offences is occurred by any party then this is treated by any person then thisis very offensive as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. (Somers and Hayward, 2012)
Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, Andy is arrested against the claim of attempted murder which was made by Nora and Oisin as per section 20.
Conclusion
Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439 is one case study which is occurred for intentionally harassment and this is unlawful activity. Under this Non-Fatal Act 1997, if anyone is involved with any crime then they are punishable by the court law. Act of guilty, mind of guilty, liability of strict, killing with unlawfully, offences which is personal, entry unlawfully to another’s real property, involvement partially with crime are included in Non-Fatal act as per Non-Fatal Act 1997(Pedain, 2002). As per Non-Fatal Act 1997, if any individual is involved with any crime then he or she will be penalised as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. The second objective is that of nemesis or retribution is reasonable for any criminal. Thirdly, the security is necessary for society and general public as per criminal law. Therefore, we can say that security or deterrence of individual is mandatory part of criminal law. Disability or incapacitation or disqualification is another objective to protect the crime. After that makeover or restoration is another part which has to be followed as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. (Vollaard, 2012)
We can say that Andy and Tim are environmentalists. But they always created problems. For this reason, they are called troublemakers (Hernandez, 2009). Andy and Tim forced the manager of Shamrock’s Cafe for purchase of fair trade coffee bean and this is very offensive. But the manager Jed has refused to buy this. After that Andy and Tim wanted to damage the Shamrock’s Cafe. For that Andy and Tim disturb the manager of Shamrock’s Cafe continuously. First Andy writes message and after that makes a call to the manager and says to close the Shamrock’s Cafe. In this time a couple goes to the Shamrock’s Cafe. Then this is tortured by the Andy. First Andy was swinging an axe on Nora’s head but this cannot touch the head of Nora. After that Andy tries to injure Oisin. Nora is injured by the Andy and after that Oisin is injured by Andy. Andy run away from this place and hide in the nearest shopping centre. At this time Tim through the petrol filled cartons to the Shamrock’s Cafe and the cafe is burned. The result is that Shamrock’s Cafe is badly damaged. A citizen whose name is Patti is observed this situation and catch up Andy from the nearest shopping centre. After that Andy is injured by the Patti. Patti is cutting Andy’s face with her ring. (Underwood and Monaghan, 1991)
Andy and Tim did offensive work for the Shamrock’s cafe and the manager of this cafe. As per Non-Fatal Act 1997, that the law mainly conducts the society and it regulates any harmful situation. Here Andy and Tim create harmful situation. For this, Andy and Tim are arrested as per Non-Fatal Act 1997.Under this criminal law if an individual is involved with any crime they are punishable by the government. This case study of Shamrock’s cafe is related with offences of participatory as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, Andy who is an environmentalist is arrested by the court of law. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, said that the person is penalised for this offensive activity. Here in this case Oisin and Nora are injured by the Andy. There have reasonable excuses which are discussed above. At first Andy forced to manager of cafe for purchase the fair trade coffee bean. The manager refused this for this reason Andy threaded the manager by make call and message. So this is the arrest able offence. After that Andy fights with the customer of the cafe. First Andy swinging an axe to the Nora’s head but this cannot touch the head of Nora. After that Andy tries to injure the Oisin. Then, Andy runs away from there. But Patti is observed this and after that Patti is cutting his face with her ring. For Nora’s injure Andy is arrested under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, Nora claims against Andy for sexual harassment. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, section 18 and section 20, the manager Jed of the Shamrock’s Cafe also claims against Andy and Tim for taking unlawful act. Under the Non-Fatal Act 1997, any destroying or injuring records which is belongs to the law of court or equity is offensive as per criminal law act. So under this act Andy and Tim should be penalised by the law of court as per Non-Fatal Act 1997. Besides that Nora and Oisin can claim against Andy and Tim for attempting murder as perNon-Fatal Act 1997.
For the conclusion as per Non-Fatal Act 1997, any individual who commits any offensive work those are arrested by the court law. The criminal law mainly conducts the society and it regulates any harmful situation. If any misbehaves or threatening is created by the person then this is under the Non -Fatal Act 1997. Besides that any attempting to murder also includes in Non-Fatal Act 1997.
References
Bouza, A. (2001). Police unbound. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Coghlan, A. (2012). Murder trial puts spotlight on widespread vitamin deficiency. New Scientist, 213(2846), pp.6-7.
Comaroff, J. and Comaroff, J. (2006). Law and disorder in the postcolony. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fitzpatrick, B. (2006). Criminal Justice Act 2003: Hearsay Provisions. The Journal of Criminal Law, 70(5), pp.372-377.
Fortson, R. (2008). Blackstone’s guide to the Serious Crime Act 2007. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hernandez, G. (2009). The troublemakers. Seattle, Wash.: Fantagraphics.
Leap, E. (2001). ‘The Suffering Prevention Act’. Emergency Medicine News, 23(5), p.31.
LIGHTSTONE, K. (2010). Fair Trade Community Café. Accounting Perspectives, 9(2), pp.157-167.
Mooney, J. and Daffern, M. (2013). The Offence Analogue and Offence Reduction Behaviour Rating Guide as a Supplement to Violence Risk Assessment in Incarcerated Offenders. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 12(4), pp.255-264.
Oksanen, V. and Välimäki, M. (2007). Theory of Deterrence and Individual Behavior. Can Lawsuits Control File Sharing on the Internet?. Review of Law & Economics, 3(3).
Orr, T. (2010). Environmentalist. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Cherry Lake Pub.
Pedain, A. (2002). DISHONEST ASSISTANCE: GUILTY CONDUCT OR A GUILTY MIND?. The Cambridge Law Journal, 61(03).
Pelham, C. and Browne, H. (2011). The new Newgate calendar, or, The chronicles of crime. [Charleston, S.C.]: BiblioLife.
Simester, A. (2005). Appraising strict liability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Somers, M. and Hayward, M. (2012). Fencing for conservation. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
Time Limit. (2002). Science, 295(5556), pp.781b-781.
Underwood, K. and Monaghan, H. (1991). Let’s explore shopping centre. Hodder & Stoughton.
Vollaard, B. (2012). Preventing crime through selective incapacitation*. The Economic Journal, 123(567), pp.262-284.
West, A. and Greenall, P. (2011). Incorporating index offence analysis into forensic clinical assessment. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 16(1), pp.144-159.
Yin, J., Yousif, M. and Mraz, R. (2000). Improving the performance of the Tivoli storage manager with threaded hardware compression. Yorktown Heights, N.Y.: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center.
