Hamlet And Ophelia Case Study

Question 8 Under the heading of offences involving criminal negligence, and section 220 stating that, “every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable”, the case of F.J. (2008) set how the section should be applied. In the case, the accused failed to act and prove the necessaires of life to this foster son by not protecting him from the abuse the son suffered from the spouse; nevertheless, the accused was acquitted of charges. It was said the first step was to decide if the accused had failed to provide the necessaries of life, and if the failure was a marked departure from the conduct of a reasonable prudent parent in circumstances where it was objectively foreseeable that the failure to provide the necessaries of life would lead to a risk of danger to life, or health of the child. If so, then there must be wanton or reckless disregard for the child’s life or safety, and must this must be significant cause of death. Therefore, the charges of Hamlet and Ophelia are unlikely to succeed, as their beliefs made them show wanton or reckless disregard for the child’s life or safety, and their …show more content…
Likewise, in the case of DeSousa (1992), the accused threw a bottle against a wall, and one fragment of glass struck a bystander and the accused was convicted, since it was an unlawful act, and a reasonable person would have foreseen the risk of non-trivial bodily harm. Similarly, Gride throwing the glass is an unlawful act, that a reasonable person would have foreseen the risk of non-trivial bodily