Legal Case

Legal Studies In celestial latitude 2002 Dominic Li answered his front door to both men (Richard Nimmo and Maua Sua) both armed with guns. Sua and Nimmo were being pay by Yonky Irvin tan, a drug dealer whom Lis brother in jurisprudence owed money to. Both Sua and Nimmo poured hydrochloric stinging onto Mr Li where he suffered burns to his face, became contrivance and burns to his oesophagus. Mr Li painfully passed onward three weeks later due to these injuries sustained as they led to a blockage in his pharynx that blocked his breathing. burning was found flagitious of plannng the come to and sentenced to life in prison.Sua and Nimmo were found not guilty to the murder but found guilty on other law-breakings. Identify the correct legal citation of the eccentric Name Dominic Li Satorre v R, R v AB, R v Tan Acid attack and murder Date 13th December 2002 Outline the elements of the offence In this grimace the elements of this case include the preparation of the event b y Tan. This is cognize as the mens rea (guilty mind) this is be by Tan admitting he had planned out the piece and paid Sua and Nimmo to kill Li for him. Also forges rea is established in this case.Acts rea is the guilty act and is revealed in the case by Sua and Nimmo pouring the acid on Lis face which eventually led to Li passing away three weeks later due to the injuries suffered in the attack. The overall offence of this act was murder. Describe the work outs that might have led to the criminal behaviour. Economics was the factor/motive for this murder. Lis brother in law (Phillip Ma) owed Tan money and had disappe bed. Tan then planned out the murder of Li as a way of finding out where Ma was and to stage to Ma that it was a sign that Tan was coming after him.Outline the report and investigation of the crime Mr Lis murder was reported to the jurisprudence by his wife who looked on in horror as her keep up had the acid poured down his throat and on his face at gunpoint. The evidence that was discovered at the crime scene was the DNA of Sua and Nimmo (Fingerprints on guns and acid bottle). Explain the role of the tourist courts The role of the courts is to hear cases being put off by the two parties and decide the outcome of the hearing. In this case the case was heard at the NSW Supreme romance.It was heard in Supreme Court as the offence committed was too severe for the local courts as it was a murder case. Outline the legal facsimile The legal representation in this case is the roles of both the crown and the prosecutor. The role of the crown in cases is to act as the prosecuting party against the defendant. The Crown is usually abbreviated or represented by R. e. g. R v Smith. The role of the prosecutor is to serve up the court in that the truth of the offence has been arrived and achieved. Identify the PleaIn the case of Dominic Lis murder the offenders involved in the crime Tan, Sua, Nimmo and Sattore all pleaded exonerated but were fou nd guilty on various offences. Firstly Tan was found guilty of planning the murder and was sentenced to life in prison. second Sua and Nimmo were found guilty but were acquitted because one of Tans associates that was involved in proving Sua and Nimmos guilt and been in prison on previous occasions was seen as unreliable. However, both Sua and Nimmo were found guilty of drug offences and both prisoned to 24 long m prison.Finally Sattore, who was found guilty of driving Sua and Nimmo to Lis house was charged with being an accessory to the crime as he admitted to having prior knowledge of the planned murder and was sentenced to 16 years in prison. After the sentences were handed down Sattore expressed his sympathy and herb of grace towards the victims friends and family. Discuss the factors that affect the sentencing decision Factors that affect sentencing decisions are conditions that may influence the final outcome and affect the expiration e. g. call forth or increase the pen alty handed down. These conditions are considered by the court when determining whether the defendant is guilty or innocent. Some conditions may crucify the gracelessness of the charge. These conditions are known as mitigating offences. In addition, conditions that may result in the charge becoming more severe are known as aggravating offences. In Mr Lis case the mitigating offence shown was that of Mr Tans associates being labelled as unreliable thereof leading to the murder charges on Sua and Nimmo being dropped.Explain the penalty granted Penalties given to the defendant may include conviction in prison. The judge determines the time that the defendant has to serve in prison based on the severity of the case that is being heard. In the case of Mr Lis murder the judge handed down the sentence of life in prison to Mr Tan, 24 years in prison to both Sua and Nimmo and 16 years imprisonment to Sattore. Analyse the extent to which the law balances the rights of victims and offende rs.In cases presented in court, the courts have to run into the both the rights of the victims and the offenders are upheld. These rights must(prenominal) be met without any bias or unfairness towards one party. In the case of Mr Dominic Lis death, his family and Mr Li himself have had their rights hold as they know that the volume responsible for Mr Lis death are serving a long time in prison for what they did. On the other hand the rights of the offenders have too been upheld. Justice has been served to Tan, Sua, Nimmo and Sattore.This has been done by Sua and Nimmo being acquitted because of an unreliable stock being used as a witness and providing an unstable statement. However, the rights of Lis family were once again maintained as both Sua and Nimmo were assuage charged for other offences and face lengthy prison sentences. Furthermore , Sattore has been dealt nicety as he is still serving time for his part in the murder but hasnt been given as severe punishment as the other member because he did not actually run through part in the killing he just drove the murderers to Lis house.He also admits to feeling extremely sorry for his actions and all of the offenders must live with the guilt of murdering Mr Dominic Li for the rest of their lives. In conclusion, the rights of both the victims and offenders have been upheld throughout the case by the final outcome. The family of Mr Li can attempt a sense of security and satisfactory out of knowing that the people who killed their beloved family member are serving time behind bars. Finally, the rights of the offenders were maintained because each member was given a fair trial and genuine a reduce punishment except for Mr Tan. Bryce Donovan