Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Case Analysis
Added on 2020-02-24
9 Pages2187 Words42 Views
|
|
|
Running head: MOOT COURT
R v Robertson [2017] QCA 164
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note
R v Robertson [2017] QCA 164
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note
1MOOT COURT
Introduction:
In the common law system, the main object of the Court of Justice is to ensure the
juridical system has been maintained properly. In the early stage of the common law system
there were some professional representation conducted before a judge1. The main objective of
the judicial system is to prevent the offenders by imposing certain penal provisions on them
so that the other members of the society do not engage themselves in crime. However, it was
stated by certain legal practitioner that the consequences of judgment can either be beneficial
to the society or it can be harmful. The beneficial effect is known as therapeutic
jurisprudence. In this report, an approach has been made towards this system through a case
law2.
Court visit:
I have had a court visit in the case of R vs Robertson (2017) QCA 164 and I have
observed many things and gained personal knowledge that enriched my mind with certain
steps regarding the Moot court practice. According to Mr Byron, it is important to bring back
the glory regarding the self representation and the process of legal jurisprudence should be
amended3. In the above mentioned case, certain provisions regarding the arson what's the
subject matter and the kiss was tried before the judge of the Queensland. The citation of the
case is [2017] QCA 164. The subject matter of the case is attempting arson along with certain
other provisions of law. In this case the applicant was the Robertson who tries to set the fire
1 Dragiewicz, M. (2015). Family law reform and domestic violence: Lessons from Australia. In Comparative
Perspectives on Domestic Violence: Lessons from Efforts Worldwide (pp. 127-140). Oxford University Press.
2 Nelson, M. J., & Hinkle, R. K. (2015). Crafting the Law: How Opinion Content Influences Legal
Development.
3 Davis, M.R. and Bennett, D., 2015. Future directions for criminal behaviour analysis of deliberately set fire
events. The psychology of arson: A practical guide to understanding and managing deliberate firesetters, p.100.
Introduction:
In the common law system, the main object of the Court of Justice is to ensure the
juridical system has been maintained properly. In the early stage of the common law system
there were some professional representation conducted before a judge1. The main objective of
the judicial system is to prevent the offenders by imposing certain penal provisions on them
so that the other members of the society do not engage themselves in crime. However, it was
stated by certain legal practitioner that the consequences of judgment can either be beneficial
to the society or it can be harmful. The beneficial effect is known as therapeutic
jurisprudence. In this report, an approach has been made towards this system through a case
law2.
Court visit:
I have had a court visit in the case of R vs Robertson (2017) QCA 164 and I have
observed many things and gained personal knowledge that enriched my mind with certain
steps regarding the Moot court practice. According to Mr Byron, it is important to bring back
the glory regarding the self representation and the process of legal jurisprudence should be
amended3. In the above mentioned case, certain provisions regarding the arson what's the
subject matter and the kiss was tried before the judge of the Queensland. The citation of the
case is [2017] QCA 164. The subject matter of the case is attempting arson along with certain
other provisions of law. In this case the applicant was the Robertson who tries to set the fire
1 Dragiewicz, M. (2015). Family law reform and domestic violence: Lessons from Australia. In Comparative
Perspectives on Domestic Violence: Lessons from Efforts Worldwide (pp. 127-140). Oxford University Press.
2 Nelson, M. J., & Hinkle, R. K. (2015). Crafting the Law: How Opinion Content Influences Legal
Development.
3 Davis, M.R. and Bennett, D., 2015. Future directions for criminal behaviour analysis of deliberately set fire
events. The psychology of arson: A practical guide to understanding and managing deliberate firesetters, p.100.
2MOOT COURT
at her friend’s place. The file number of this case is CA 43 of 2017. DC no. 465 of 2017
(new) and DC no. 2635 of 2016. The name of the presiding judge in this case was Atkinson J
and Philippides JJA. The hearing date of this case was 27th April 2017.
Case summary:
This case is concerned with the attempt to arson in the territory of another4. The
accused was preliminary heard before the Lower court and sentenced him for the period of 5
years of imprisonment. In the present case an apple has been made against the order of the
Lower court. There are certain Grounds mentioned under the provision of law regarding the
penalty profession of the judgement-based profession5. There are many cases references
taken by the judges of the court regarding the same offence. In Silsack v Rhode (2017) QCA,
arson had been done regarding the property of another and round word was finalized with the
term of 5 years of imprisonment. However it was observed by the judges of the court that the
scope of this case is quite different than the other cases. It is also been stated that the person
has not done the crime arson. There was an attempt has been taken by the accused. In this
case the applicant prayed for an appeal reduces the sentencing order of the Lower court.
Role and contention of the judges:
It was held by Philippides J. that it is the discretionary power of the judge to decide
the terms of the sentence regarding any offence. It is clear from the confession this statement
of the appellant that he was engaged in an attempt to arson. It is also stated by the judge that
if there are sufficient proof regarding the matter that person who have Set Fire and the house
of another or attempt to commit arson without affecting the whole parts of the building, the
4 Pooley, K., 2015. An analysis of youth misuse of fire in New South Wales.
5 Papalia, N., Thomas, S.D., Ching, H. and Daffern, M., 2015. Changes in the prevalence and nature of violent
crime by youth in Victoria, Australia. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(2), pp.213-223.
at her friend’s place. The file number of this case is CA 43 of 2017. DC no. 465 of 2017
(new) and DC no. 2635 of 2016. The name of the presiding judge in this case was Atkinson J
and Philippides JJA. The hearing date of this case was 27th April 2017.
Case summary:
This case is concerned with the attempt to arson in the territory of another4. The
accused was preliminary heard before the Lower court and sentenced him for the period of 5
years of imprisonment. In the present case an apple has been made against the order of the
Lower court. There are certain Grounds mentioned under the provision of law regarding the
penalty profession of the judgement-based profession5. There are many cases references
taken by the judges of the court regarding the same offence. In Silsack v Rhode (2017) QCA,
arson had been done regarding the property of another and round word was finalized with the
term of 5 years of imprisonment. However it was observed by the judges of the court that the
scope of this case is quite different than the other cases. It is also been stated that the person
has not done the crime arson. There was an attempt has been taken by the accused. In this
case the applicant prayed for an appeal reduces the sentencing order of the Lower court.
Role and contention of the judges:
It was held by Philippides J. that it is the discretionary power of the judge to decide
the terms of the sentence regarding any offence. It is clear from the confession this statement
of the appellant that he was engaged in an attempt to arson. It is also stated by the judge that
if there are sufficient proof regarding the matter that person who have Set Fire and the house
of another or attempt to commit arson without affecting the whole parts of the building, the
4 Pooley, K., 2015. An analysis of youth misuse of fire in New South Wales.
5 Papalia, N., Thomas, S.D., Ching, H. and Daffern, M., 2015. Changes in the prevalence and nature of violent
crime by youth in Victoria, Australia. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(2), pp.213-223.
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents