Crime and Problem Solving

Crime and Problem Solving Kim Everett (k.everett@gre.ac.uk) Opi Outhwaite (o.m.outhwaite@gre.ac.uk) Lynne Hanmore (l.hanmore@gre.ac.uk) University of Greenwich Law School

Rationale for the course Old model: • Contract Law • Public Law • English Legal System and Human Rights • Legal Method

Rationale for the course Problems identified • Problem-solving skills • Working from primary sources • Autonomous learning

Theoretical basis • Students learn through doing • Teaching works best when seen by students to relate directly to their assessment • Systematic and thoughtful assessment is principal driver for learning • Crucial role of feedback

Course learning outcomes On completing this course you will be able to: • demonstrate problem-solving skills by applying legal knowledge to factual scenarios of limited complexity and providing appropriate legal advice • work from primary legal sources • start to operate as an autonomous learner within a supportive environment • write in a relatively clear and concise writing style • present arguments in a logical and coherent manner • reflect on your own learning

Course structure: workshops • Weekly 2 hour workshops • Students work in small groups • Working only from primary sources • plus occasional lectures • Aid learning but not to transmit information

Course structure: Assessment • All based on the Bourne scenario Coursework 1 handed in in week 4; 25% Coursework 2 handed in in week 12; 75%

Week 1: Brainstorming the problem • Lecture • Workshop: • Introduction to course • Ice breaker • Brainstorming

Week 2: reading statutes Read the copy of the Protection of Harassment Act you have been give (ignore s.5 and s.5A) • How many offences can you find? • What are the elements of the offences? • Now try to apply the law to the facts:

Deal with Martin first. • Start with s.1. • Take each element separately (starting with course of conduct) • Note down the facts from the scenario that might be relevant to that element (this is an easier task if you have your summary of material facts from seminar 1) • Draw a conclusion on whether that element is satisfied (and note the terminology here: the offence has not been committed nor is M “guilty” until all elements have been proven) • Now move on to the next element (the conduct must amount to harassment of another) and so on • If you conclude that all elements have been satisfied, only then can you conclude that Martin is guilty of the offence. Remember that the prosecution have to prove beyond reasonable doubt each element of the offence • Now do the same for s.4 • Then carry out the same exercise for Gary

Week 3: using cases Task: Seminar 3 (week 4) Read the case of R v Curtis carefully. We will give you guidance on how to do this. • Does s. 4 require that the course of conduct amounts to harassment? • What, according to this case, is the meaning of harassment. Does it add to or contradict the statute? • What is the meaning of a course of conduct?

Before you start you might like to bullet point the key facts • When making notes on law: distinguish between • what Pill LJ is saying • what judges in other cases are saying (you might find it useful to summarise other cases under headings) • whether Pill LJ is agreeing with cases (if lower court can disagree, if same level of higher must “distinguish”) • You might find it useful to use headings.

Week 4 • Lecture: How to answer a problem • Workshop: • Continued work on cases • Students to add to their answers using notes from cases .

Week 5 • Lecture: Assessment Guidance • Workshop: Putting it all together

Assessment 1 • Small part of the Bourne Scenario (Gary) • 4 workshops • Lecture: • ‘how to write a good answer’ • Assessment advice

Feedback on Assessment 1 • Turnaround in 1 week • Detailed written feedback on coursework script • General feedback in lecture • Individual oral feedback if required (only if student had read feedback and attended lecture)

Assessment 2 • Students to answer whole scenario (with a few modifications)

Crime and Problem Solving