ASSIGNMENT l CRIMINAL LAW AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES.
Added on 2022-10-04
9 Pages2201 Words18 Views
Running head: CRIMINAL LAW AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
CRIMINAL LAW AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note
CRIMINAL LAW AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note
1CRIMINAL LAW AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
Principle of Fair Labelling and Theft
The principle of fair labelling concerns with the subdivision and labelling of the offences
for the fair representation of the magnitude and nature of law-breaking and that the distinctions
between the different kinds and degrees of offences and wrongdoings are being respected and
signaled by law.1 The basic aim of the criminal law is ensuring that a proportionate response is
present toward law breaking for the assistance of the educative or declaratory functions of the
law in sustaining and reinforcing of social standards. For proper public communication, for the
decision of the maximum penalty that is appropriate, the evaluation of the previous convictions,
for the classification in prison the labelling and punishment of the offenders proportionate to the
wrongdoings committed by them is necessary.2
According to the Theft Act 1968 section 1(1)3 if a person dishonestly appropriates any
property that belongs to someone else with an intention to permanently deprive the other person
of the property, then he is said to be guilty of committing theft. The distinction between theft and
obtaining property by deception had been largely collapsed by the House of Lords in the case
DPP v Gomez4 by holding that an authorized act could be amounting to appropriation. According
to the English Law criminal offences are needed to be describing the prohibited conducts as
clearly as it can be possible. For example, it can be seen that there have been resistance have
been raised for replacing rape and indecent assault with a broad category under sexual assault by
abandoning the distinction between rape and indecent assault. The reason for this resistance is
very simple. For reflecting the extent of the wrongdoing and the level of harm involved offences
1 Herring, Jonathan. Criminal law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, USA, 2014.
2 Ashworth, Andrew, and Jeremy Horder. Principles of criminal law. Oxford University Press, 2013.
3 Theft Act 1968, s.1(1)
4 DPP v Gomez [1992] 3 WLR 1067
Principle of Fair Labelling and Theft
The principle of fair labelling concerns with the subdivision and labelling of the offences
for the fair representation of the magnitude and nature of law-breaking and that the distinctions
between the different kinds and degrees of offences and wrongdoings are being respected and
signaled by law.1 The basic aim of the criminal law is ensuring that a proportionate response is
present toward law breaking for the assistance of the educative or declaratory functions of the
law in sustaining and reinforcing of social standards. For proper public communication, for the
decision of the maximum penalty that is appropriate, the evaluation of the previous convictions,
for the classification in prison the labelling and punishment of the offenders proportionate to the
wrongdoings committed by them is necessary.2
According to the Theft Act 1968 section 1(1)3 if a person dishonestly appropriates any
property that belongs to someone else with an intention to permanently deprive the other person
of the property, then he is said to be guilty of committing theft. The distinction between theft and
obtaining property by deception had been largely collapsed by the House of Lords in the case
DPP v Gomez4 by holding that an authorized act could be amounting to appropriation. According
to the English Law criminal offences are needed to be describing the prohibited conducts as
clearly as it can be possible. For example, it can be seen that there have been resistance have
been raised for replacing rape and indecent assault with a broad category under sexual assault by
abandoning the distinction between rape and indecent assault. The reason for this resistance is
very simple. For reflecting the extent of the wrongdoing and the level of harm involved offences
1 Herring, Jonathan. Criminal law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press, USA, 2014.
2 Ashworth, Andrew, and Jeremy Horder. Principles of criminal law. Oxford University Press, 2013.
3 Theft Act 1968, s.1(1)
4 DPP v Gomez [1992] 3 WLR 1067
2CRIMINAL LAW AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
are needed to be structured, labeled and punished accordingly. The categorization of the criminal
offences is done for the symbolic reasons for the communication of the differing degrees of
unacceptability or rejection of different types of conduct. All the offences relating to the
properties are seen to be sharing the same concern of protecting various interests in the
properties. In an effort for marking different kinds of harms and wrongs that are involved
maintaining of clear distinction between the different offences has been sought by the English
law. As an example it can be seen that burglary, theft and handling of stolen goods are
differentiated for the obvious reasons. Theft can most clearly be seen to be relating to most of the
offences of deception. The owner can be seen to losing his property to another in both theft and
deception but the moral distinction between the two can be marked by the method of losing the
property.
Crimes can generally be described by the terms of their paradigms. However there are
many instances where it can be seen that an offence coming under the definition of the offence
but falling outside its paradigm. For example the paradigm of theft is seen to be involving
forcible taking of a property whereas for an offence of deception, its paradigm is seen to be
involving confrontation and participation in the loss of a property by the victim. In case of a theft
the owner would be helpless as there would be a high risk for violence. In deception there is an
opportunity present to the victim for the prevention of the offence. The victim in a deception
offence can be seen to be agreeing to part with their property in a voluntary way whereas the
victim of theft can be seen to be parting with the property in an involuntary way.
English criminal law can be seen to be containing some extremely wide categories of
offences. In English criminal law theft has been described as a single offence with maximum of
seven years of imprisonment, similarly criminal damage is also described as a single offence
are needed to be structured, labeled and punished accordingly. The categorization of the criminal
offences is done for the symbolic reasons for the communication of the differing degrees of
unacceptability or rejection of different types of conduct. All the offences relating to the
properties are seen to be sharing the same concern of protecting various interests in the
properties. In an effort for marking different kinds of harms and wrongs that are involved
maintaining of clear distinction between the different offences has been sought by the English
law. As an example it can be seen that burglary, theft and handling of stolen goods are
differentiated for the obvious reasons. Theft can most clearly be seen to be relating to most of the
offences of deception. The owner can be seen to losing his property to another in both theft and
deception but the moral distinction between the two can be marked by the method of losing the
property.
Crimes can generally be described by the terms of their paradigms. However there are
many instances where it can be seen that an offence coming under the definition of the offence
but falling outside its paradigm. For example the paradigm of theft is seen to be involving
forcible taking of a property whereas for an offence of deception, its paradigm is seen to be
involving confrontation and participation in the loss of a property by the victim. In case of a theft
the owner would be helpless as there would be a high risk for violence. In deception there is an
opportunity present to the victim for the prevention of the offence. The victim in a deception
offence can be seen to be agreeing to part with their property in a voluntary way whereas the
victim of theft can be seen to be parting with the property in an involuntary way.
English criminal law can be seen to be containing some extremely wide categories of
offences. In English criminal law theft has been described as a single offence with maximum of
seven years of imprisonment, similarly criminal damage is also described as a single offence
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.