@checkmatetrain@Moriarty1169 thank you both. Exam smashed! 82%
Crime 81.6%
E&P 93.55%
Duties 75%
No idea how I got that on E&P but I am not complaining, you’re both made the process enjoyable, simple and my revision as effective as possible.
Thank you so much!
@checkmatetrain I just did a mock out of interest, I have mainly been reading revision list for past 2 weeks so couldn’t really remember any of the MCQs.
90% crime, 50% E&P, 68% on Duties
There was a lot of sections that didn’t come up from the revision list, so feel good!
@checkmatetrain Paul I would say true if I remember correctly from Juliana’s USB. Isn’t it down to the scope of what the shop sell, hypothetically in B&Q this would not be an offence, however in a supermarket it would be?
@checkmatetrain Legend Paul, utilising plan b for March, finished stage 1 and feel comfortable (occasionally review my notes which are specific points I sometimes forget). Onto stage 2 now!
@HG25813802@checkmatetrain I understand the intent of the offender negates the consent of the shop, but I’m confused how now to establish whether a regular theft is a theft or burglary if it was always the plan of suspect to steal if that makes sense
@checkmatetrain At what point does it become an act that is more then merely preparatory, to me, he has entered the location rather then simply attending. There is clear men’s rea and an element of actus via entering. Due to this, I lean to attempted theft.
@checkmatetrain Hi Paul,
This would come down to boundaries? DEW may have entered the premises, but there is nothing to suggest he has done so as a trespasser.
Even in the shop, by the sounds of it he has not crossed any boundary as a trespasser so there can’t be a 9.1(a). I’m between B&C.