Ability to apply the proofs of larceny to determine if the proofs can be satisfied in the issues that arise in the case study
Criteria 1: Ability to apply the proofs of larceny to determine if the proofs can be satisfied in the issues that arise in the case study. (5 marks)
Don’t analyse all incident make a general discussion
Criteria 2: Ability to explain with reference to the case study as to how police must apply LEPRA if they intend to question, search, or arrest or caution a suspect. (5 marks).
Criteria 3: Ability to identify the alternatives that are available to police when dealing with the issues raised in the case study. (5 marks)
There are many alternatives to police in dealing with the larceny
Criteria 4: Ability to critically discuss LEPRA and the rule of law in outlining the type of actions, if any, you would take as a police officer concerning the matters raised in the case study. (6 marks).
Criteria 5: Ability to critically reflect upon your decisions and discuss why you considered other alternatives were not as appropriate for dealing with the situations presented in the case study. (5 marks).
The following combines the requirements of Criteria 3 & 4. (i) Identify and discuss the alternatives open to police (arrest and charging, taking no action, on the spot caution, Summons; Court Attendance notice; Infringement notice) in dealing with the case scenario. (ii) Place yourself in the shoes of a police officer and make a decision on what type of action, if any to take (with reference to LEPRA and rule of law criteria). (iii) Reflect upon your actions and support your decision (this would involve discussing why you considered the other alternatives were not as appropriate for dealing with the situation presented in the case scenario).