This assessment will be given a mark out of 40 and is worth 40% of your marks for the unit. The assessment is comprised of Part A and Part B. Submit your answers to both Part A and Part B together in one word document. Make sure Part A and Part B are clearly labelled.
Create a header for your assignment. In your header include your name, student number, date submitted, total word count, and ‘LWZ114 Criminal Law Assessment 1’. For example, a header will look similar to this;
Word Count: 2,554,
Assignment Type:LWZ114 Criminal Law Assessment 1
LWZ114 Criminal Law Assessment-Charles Darwin University Australia.

Failure to include a proper header will incur a 1 mark deduction.

The word limit for Part A and Part B combined is 2,500 words (+/- 10%). This means that you should write at least 2,250 words for this assignment and you should be able to complete the assignment in 2,500 words. Answers longer than 2,750 words will incur a flat-rate penalty of 1 mark per 200 words over (ie an assignment of 2,962 words will incur a 2 mark penalty).

Extension requests are not processed by individual lecturers – they are processed centrally by the College. Please see Law Central 2020 for the extension request policy and late submission penalties, and direct any extension related queries If an extension is granted, extensions
are generally measured by days, not weeks. The maximum permissible extension is 2 weeks.

You must use AGLC referencing. Reasonable references in footnotes do not count towards the total word count. You should use headings and sub-headings. Reasonable headings and subheadings do not count towards the word count. Your answers must use complete sentences (other than
headings).

In marking the assignments, we will consider 4 criteria; structure, analysis, authority and language.Descriptions of these criteria are found at the end of this document.

Parts A and B consist of a series of smaller questions. We have indicated the marks we will award to each sub-question. Use the number of marks awarded as a guide to how many words you should dedicate to each sub-question.

Part A: This part is worth
X and Y are French backpackers, who are spending time working on a mango farm around one hour’s drive outside of Darwin. Both X and Y have quite limited English proficiency, but they are keen to explore as much of the NT as they can and they try to make friends with anyone who will take them to new parts of the Territory.

One evening, X and Y meet Bluey and Strath at the local pub. Bluey and Strath offer to take X and Y out fishing in their boat on the Adelaide River, provided X and Y pay for half the cost of the fuel. Because of communication difficulties, X and Y don’t completely understand that they will be required to pay for fuel.

LWZ114 Criminal Law Assessment-Charles Darwin University Australia.

Early on Saturday morning (13 March 2021), the 4 men tow the boat out to Adelaide River. At the boat ramp there are signs warning about the dangers of crocodiles, but these are in English. As they launch the boat (a 4.5 meter tinny) X wades waist deep into the water. Bluey yells at him to get out saying, ‘mate, the crocs will have you for lunch. You’ve got to be mad to get in the water.’ Bluey points at the signs and says ‘Crocs are in this river.’ Y hears this and tells Bluey and Strath that he’s never seen a crocodile, ‘but maybe I get a photo today? For Instagram.’

The men launch the boat and spend 4 hours fishing up and down the river, drinking a fair amount of beer. X only drinks 1 beer, but Y drinks 8 beers. During this time, they have not seen any large adult crocodiles; they’ve only spotted a few juvenile crocodiles around 1 – 1.5 metres long. X says
‘crocodiles are small?’ Bluey and Strath laugh, and Strath replies, ‘mate, the crocs in this river are bigger than this tinny we’re in. They make my land cruiser look short.’ X and Y think that Strath is trying to play a trick on them, and X responds ‘you think we’re stupid?’

‘Nah,’ says Bluey, ‘crocs in the river can eat people.’

Soon after, X accidentally drops the fishing rod into the river, and it quickly sinks. The fishing rod belonged to Bluey, who immediately gets angry and starts berating X. ‘Stupid Frenchy. That rod costs $200. Now you owe us $100 for the fuel, $50 for the beer and $200 for the rod.’

X and Y think that Bluey and Strath are trying to take advantage of them. A shouting match quickly ensues, with Bluey and Strath yelling in English and X and Y yelling French. Strath and Bluey both make a number of racially based insults, including ‘French frog lickers’ and ‘European snail lovers’.

X loses his temper and punches Bluey in the face, which causes Bluey to fall over the side of the boat. As he falls, his head hits the edge of the gunnel. He falls under the water, then comes to the surface, but is clearly disoriented. Strath starts shouting, ‘get him out! Get him out! He’s gonna get eaten.’

LWZ114 Criminal Law Assessment-Charles Darwin University Australia.

As Strath leans over the edge to try to reach Bluey, Y says ‘Your turn, stupid Aussie.’ Y puts all his weight on the edge of the boat, causing it to dip to the side and Strath also falls over the edge.

X and Y begin laughing, and X pulls out his phone and begins a video recording of Bluey and Strath in the water. Strath is clearly looking panicked, shouting ‘help us get in the boat!’ Y says, ‘Aussie scared
of the little crocodile?’ and continues laughing.

X and Y see movement in the water around 20 metres away. They look, and see the back of a crocodile going under the surface of the water. They can’t see the entire crocodile, but the portion they can see is about 3-4 metres long. X says ‘A big croc? Maybe they are big. Good for Instagram.’

They watch for several seconds, hoping to get some video of the croc, but they do not see the croc again. After around 15 seconds, Y reaches out his hand to help Strath get in the boat, but Strath is dragged under water and never seen again.

X and Y are shocked, but they help pull Bluey into the boat. They return to the boat ramp, where they wait until police arrive.

After an initial investigation, police arrest X and Y, who both decline to participate in a record of interview. Strath’s body is never found. The next day the NT News runs a front-page headline‘Violent French gang feeds Aussie victim to crocodile.’

You work for the DPP as a prosecutor. The investigating officer comes to you, completely bewildered about what charges to proceed with. Police instruct that they want to proceed with the most serious charges possible (that is, the charges with the highest maximum punishment) that are likely to secure a conviction.

Bluey does not suffer any long-term physical injuries, but is diagnosed with PTSD.

LWZ114 Criminal Law Assessment-Charles Darwin University Australia.

Assuming that police can prove the facts above, advise police;
1) What charge to pursue against X. Select one charge from the Criminal Code
a. Make sure you specify the victim/s of the alleged offence.
b. Make sure you set out all the elements of the offence you choose, and which facts exist to support each element.
c. Include a conclusion about the likely prospects of a successful conviction. In your conclusion, also state the maximum possible punishment for that offence.
d. If there is a similar, but more serious, charge that you do not recommend pursuing,briefly state your reasons for not pursuing the more serious charge.

2) What charge to pursue against Y. Select one charge from the Criminal Code (NT).
a. Make sure you specify the victim/s of the alleged offence.
b. Make sure you set out all the elements of the offence you choose, and which facts exist to support each element.
c. Include a conclusion about the likely prospects of a successful conviction. In your conclusion, also state the maximum possible punishment for that offence.
d. If there is a similar, but more serious, charge that you do not recommend pursuing,briefly state your reasons for not pursuing the more serious charge.

In your advice to police, do not consider any form of joint criminal liability or common purpose.

Part B: This part is worth
Sally is a CDU student, living in Alice Springs. Most mornings Sally catches a bus to the Alice Springs campus.

On Thursday 11 March 2021, unbeknownst to Sally, another member of the public sees someone putting a suspicious item into a backpack at the bus station. The member of the public calls police and reports that ‘there’s someone about to get on the bus, and they’re carrying something that
looks like it might be a weapon or something. They look dodgy. They’re a young female, with black hair, wearing a black hoodie.’

Sally, coincidentally, is also female with black hair and is wearing a black hoodie. She gets on the bus, and around 5 minutes later, the bus is pulled over by police. Constable Bob boards the bus, and points to Sally and another female passenger wearing a black hoodie and tells them to get off the bus. Sally is feeling extremely nervous, and slightly confused.

Constable Bob, together with his partner, Senior Constable Ryan, tell Sally and the other passenger to stand on the sidewalk. ‘Before we search you, is there anything you want to tell us?’ says Constable Bob.

‘Why are you searching us?’ asks Sally.

‘That’s not your business. Now, are you going to comply?’ Sally is feeling extremely scared and doesn’t say anything.

Police search the other passenger, and find 2 large wrenches and a set of spanners in her backpack.

‘What are these for?’ asks Senior Constable Ryan.

‘I’m an apprentice mechanic’ replies the other passenger.
‘Right, now your turn,’ says Senior Constable Ryan, turning to Sally.
‘No, you can’t do this. I haven’t done anything’ says Sally.

‘Don’t hinder, or you’ll make trouble for yourself,’ growls Constable Bob, who reaches out and grabs Sally’s backpack. Sally doesn’t let go of the backpack.

‘Right, you’re under arrest for hindering.’ says Senior Constable Ryan, who then ground stabilises Sally.

Sally begins yelling out ‘get off me, you brute!’ She is face down on the ground, but continues struggling, and Senior Constable Ryan begins putting handcuffs on her, with Sally’s arms behind her back. Sally pulls her arms away from the handcuffs, and Sally’s elbow makes contact with Senior
Constable Ryan’s lip, causing it to split and bleed.

Police arrest Sally for assault police and take her back to the police station. At the police station, police search Sally and her backpack. In her backpack, they find a small zip lock bag with white powder in it. They show it to Sally, who is in the cells. They caution her, then Constable Bob says‘now I can see why you wouldn’t let us search your backpack. You’re in a lot of trouble.’

Sally responds ‘That’s not even mine. I was just meant to pass it on to some friends at a party next week.’

‘Oh, so you’re supplying drugs?’ asks Constable Bob.

Sally refuses to answer any more questions. Sally is refused bail. Sally is charged with;

1) Aggravated Assault police (contrary to s 189A(2)(a) of the Criminal Code (NT))
2) Supply of a traffickable quantity of a Schedule 1 drug (contrary to s 5A(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1990)

Forensic testing states that the white powder is a mixture of 2 grams of Codeine powder and 0.25 grams of Methoxyethylenedioxyamphetamine, with a total weight of 2.25 grams.

You’re a duty lawyer down at the Alice Springs Local Court. You visit Sally down in the cells. Sally is extremely scared, ‘please, just help me get out,’ she says to you.

When you ask Sally about the white powder she tells you ‘one of my friends gave it to me to take to a party on the weekend to give to some of our friends. She told me it was codeine powder. I didn’t think it’s that serious. It’s just like having a bit of weed, right?’

Provide structured advice to Sally about;
1) What is the bail presumption for each of the offences she is charged with. Briefly set out your reasons with reference to relevant sections of the Bail Act 1982 (NT).
2) Should Sally plead guilty or not guilty to the offence against s 189A(2)(a) Criminal Code (NT)?
3) Should Sally plead guilty or not guilty to the offence against s 5A(1) Misuse of Drugs Act 1990?

In relation to your advice about pleading guilty or not guilty to each charge, make sure to structure your advice according to the elements of each offence and take into account the relevance (if any) of police actions. Assume that all conversations between Sally and the police officers are admissible.

Bonus point:
1.Do any mandatory sentencing provisions apply if Sally pleads guilty or is found guilty of the offence against s 189A(2)(a) Criminal Code (NT)? Briefly set out any mandatory sentencing requirements and your reasons with reference to any relevant legislation.
2.Do any mandatory sentencing provisions apply if Sally pleads guilty or is found guilty of the offence against s 5A(1) Misuse of Drugs Act 1990? Briefly set out any mandatory sentencing requirements and your reasons with reference to any relevant legislation.