Jamie will be Charged with Fraud by Dishonesty Obtaining a Financial Advantage Case Study - Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task:

Task:

Part A

Jamie will be charged with fraud by dishonesty obtaining a financial advantage under s192E Crimes act.

Callum will be charged with larceny and psychic assault under s117 and s61 of the Crimes Act 1990.

The prosecution must prove all elements of each offence beyond a reasonable doubt (BRD) (Woolmington).

Jamie may seek to reply on the defence of duress and Callum seek to rely on the defence of intoxication. If successful, the legal burden shifts to the prosecution to disprove these defences BRD (Woolmington)

Jamie’s liability

Fraud by dishonesty obtaining a financial advantage

 

Actus Reas

 

1. Deception

Jamie has engaged in deception by making false statement where he created a fake invoice using his workplace computer in accordance with his made-up customer account.

 

2. Obtains Financial Advantage

On the fact, Jamie had made a $500 transaction to his bank account through his fraudulent act. Jamie have obtained a financial advantage under s192d(1).

 

3. Causation

The is a causal connection between the deception used by Jamie- creating a false account and invoice and the financial advantage - $500 obtained. The misleading conduct using machine has cause the computer authorised an illegal transaction.

 

Mens Rea

 

1. Intentional or reckless deception

Jamie’s deception was proved to be intentional under s192B(2). Jamie had skilfully performed the methods of obtaining the money by creating a fake account and invoice through his working account, which shows that he has knowledge and aware of the action he performed is fraudulent.

 

 

 

2. Dishonesty

Jamie was found to have acted with dishonesty according to the statutory definition found in s4B, where ‘dishonest according to the standard of ordinary people and known by the defendant to be dishonest according to the standards of ordinary people.

 

Temporal Coincidence

The requirement of temporal coincidence in this case requires the deception is either intentional or reckless imports a requirement that the accused had the necessary mens rea at the time of the deception (DPP v Ray)

 

In Jamie’s case, it has been found that he had the intention to deceive and performed the illegal act of obtaining financial advantage, Jamie will be liable for the charge of fraud.

 

Defence: With the charge of Fraud, Jamie can raise a defence of duress.

 

There are 8 factors to consider for duress (R v Hurley and Murray)

1. Where the is a threat of death or GBH to a person if D failed to follow out the instruction

Jamie was under D- Callum’s threat as he orally- “If you don’t find me $500 by midday, I’ll use this to teach you a lesson” and physically- continuingly placing a knife against his neck threatened him

 

2. A person of ‘ordinary firmness of mind’ would have yielded

Since Callum and Jamie were in a relationship for 5 years, it is to be assumed that a reasonable person would not have yielded to this form of threat. However, noting that Jamie was under an abusive relationship over those years which makes her not in the “ordinary firmness state of mind”

 

3. Threat was present, continuing and imminent

Oral threat was made and indicate the time that the instruction should be carried out

 

4. D reasonably believed the threat would be carried out

As Callum had been physically and emotionally abusive over 5 years in this relationship; it is to be believed that Jamie would reasonably believe the threat would be carried out

 

5. D was induced to commit the crime because of the threat

With the fear of being harm by Callum (after being put against a knife on his neck), Jamie was induced to commit the crime because of the threat

 

6. D did not voluntarily expose themselves to the threat (Shepherd)

Jamie was voluntarily exposing himself to this threat as he had chosen to continue in this abusive relationship

 

7. D had no means of preventing the execution of the threat (Williams 1972)

Being in a De Facto relationship (also with a joint account with the partner), it can be seen as difficult (not impossible) for D to escape the premise

 

8. Not available for murder/ attempted murder

 

Considering the 8 factors of establishing duress, it is likely that Jamie could be successful in raising this defence.

 

Callum’s liability

 

Psychic Assault

 

Callum may be liable for psychic assault (Darby) under s61 of the Act. Callum may attempt to reply on defence of intoxication.

AR: The prosecution must prove there was a threatening application of unlawful contact which caused V to reasonably apprehend/fear imminent unlawful contact.

1. Voluntariness

The prosecution cannot presume voluntariness because there is evidence to the contrary due to Callum’s intoxication. The issue of voluntariness will eb discussed below under defences.

 

2. Threatening application of unlawful contact

Callum had performed a positive threatening act of “pacing up and down the hallway, punching holes in the wall and yelling abuse at Jamie” and furthered this intimidating behaviour by “holds a paring knife close to Jamie’s neck”. By placing a knife to Jamie’s neck constitutes to be a positive act (Fagan)

The above  Law Assignment has been solved by our  Law Assignment  Experts at onlineassignmentbank. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.