I85PREP
⌘ K
LPAB Diploma in Law study materials
LPAB Diploma in Law study resources

LPAB Diploma in Law: Criminal Law and Procedure: Elements, Defences and Process

LPAB Diploma in Law · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Criminal Law and Procedure: Elements, Defences and Process

Building blocks

Criminal liability generally requires proof beyond reasonable doubt of physical elements (conduct, circumstances, consequences) and fault elements (intention, knowledge, recklessness, negligence). Distinguish mens rea from motive, and remember that statutory offence provisions vary: read the provision carefully to see whether fault attaches to every physical element or only some.

Defences

Understand the difference between complete exculpatory defences (self-defence, duress, necessity, mental impairment, automatism) and partial defences reducing murder to manslaughter (provocation/loss of control, excessive self-defence, substantial impairment). Insanity and automatism both negate voluntariness or responsibility, but on different bases: automatism is a denial of voluntary conduct; mental impairment is a positive defence.

Procedure

Know the criminal process: investigation, arrest and bail, committal or early case conferencing, trial, sentencing, appeal. Bail involves an unacceptable risk test in most Australian jurisdictions. Key trial concepts include the burden and standard of proof, the right to silence, the Browne v Dunn rule, and the discretion to exclude improperly obtained evidence.

Common traps

  • Confusing the legal burden (prosecution) with evidential burdens that may shift.
  • Treating intoxication as a general defence; it is usually relevant only to whether the fault element was formed.
  • Forgetting that self-defence requires a reasonable belief in the need for force and a proportionate response.
  • Mixing up the elements of attempt (intent plus conduct going beyond mere preparation).

Worked example

A charge of assault occasioning bodily harm requires proof of an assault, actual bodily harm, and causation. If the accused raises self-defence, the prosecution must disprove it beyond reasonable doubt; if the accused was intoxicated, ask whether the fault element for the assault was actually formed, not whether the intoxication excuses the act.