LA2002: Classifications of Defense:
Apply classifications of defense and justifications in criminal justice settings.
Written Response Submission Form
Your Name: First and last
Your E-Mail Address: Your email here
Instructions
Write your responses where it reads “Enter your response here.” Write as much as needed to satisfy the requirements indicated. Each item contains the rubric that will be used to evaluate your responses.
Item 1
Read the case studies found in the Criminal Justice Case Studies: Criminal Law and Defense document.
In 500-750 words, address the following:
- What is the actus reus, or the action that caused harm?
- What is the mens rea, or the intent of the person who caused the harm? Be sure to discuss the level of mens rea (purposeful, knowing, reckless, and negligent) and explain how you came to this conclusion.
- Is there concurrence? Did the actus reus and the mens rea occur together?
- Which excusable or justifiable defense could be applied to this case? What information from the scenario led you to this conclusion?
Your Response
Enter your response here.
Rubric
| 0
Not Present |
1
Needs Improvement |
2
Meets Expectations |
|
| Classifications of Defense | |||
| Identify the actus reus, or the action that caused harm in each crime scenario.
Identify the mens rea, or the intent of the person who caused the harm in each crime scenario. LO1: Identify actus reus and mens rea in a crime scenario. |
The response accurately identifies less than half of the instances of actus reas and/or mens reas. | The response accurately identifies at least half of the instances of actus reas and/or mens reas. | The response accurately identifies all instances of actus reus and the mens rea. |
| Determine if there is concurrence in each crime scenario.
LO2: Determine instances of concurrence in a crime scenario. |
The response accurately determines if there is concurrence in less than half of the crime scenarios. | The response accurately determines if there is concurrence in at least half of the crime scenarios.
|
The response accurately determines if there is concurrence in each crime scenario.
|
| Identify which classification of defense applies to each scenario.
LO3: Identify appropriate classifications of defense that connect with crime scenarios. |
Response is not present, or fails to identify less than half of the classifications of defense that apply to the case studies. | The response accurately identifies at least half of the classifications of defense that apply to the scenarios but not for all case studies. | The response accurately identifies which classification of defense applies to each case study.
|
| Explain which excusable or justifiable defense could be applied to each case.
LO4: Apply classifications of defense to crime scenarios. |
Response is not present, or fails to explain why each defense fits the crime for less than half of the classifications of defense that apply to the case studies. | The response explains why each defense fits the crime for at least half of the case studies but not for all case studies.
The response does not or does not sufficiently incorporate information from each case study and/or from the other learning resources to support each explanation. |
The response explains which excusable or justifiable defense could be applied to this case.
The response incorporates information from each case study and from the other learning resources to support each explanation. |
Hire Fix My GPA to help you complete your online class
Item 2
In 250-500 words, respond to the following:
- How does the concept of an action being defensible apply to procedures and strategies that you may use—or be required to use— as a police officer, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor when preparing for a case where the defendant plans to state that they did commit the crime, but that they are not guilty because the action was defensible?
- How do one’s actions as a police officer, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor change based on the type of defense the defendant uses?
If you have practical experience in addressing a defense, draw on that experience or on the learning resources to support your response.
Your Response
Enter your response here.
Rubric
| 0
Not Present |
1
Needs Improvement |
2
Meets Expectations |
|
| Criminal Justice Strategies Related to a Defense | |||
| How does the concept of an action being defensible apply to procedures and strategies you may use—or be required to use—as a police officer, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor when preparing for a case where the defendant plans to state that they did commit the crime, but that they are not guilty because the action was defensible?
LO3: Apply criminal justice strategies to address defensible actions. |
Response is not present. | The response attempts in an insufficient or not fully plausible way to apply the concept of actionable defense procedures and strategies used by a police officer, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor when preparing for a case where the defendant plans to state that they did commit the crime, but that they are not guilty because the action was defensible but the application.
The response is not fully or accurately supported by professional experience or the learning resources. |
The response applies the concept of actionable defense procedures and strategies used by a police officer, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor when preparing for a case where the defendant plans to state that they did commit the crime, but that they are not guilty because the action was defensible.
The response supports reasoning by drawing on professional experience or on the learning resources. |
| How does one’s actions as a police officer, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor change based on the type of defense the defendant uses?
LO4: Apply criminal justice strategies in response to varied defenses. |
Response is not present. | The response does not fully address the potential for action by a criminal justice professional to change depending on a possible defense and/or does not fully explain how and why this may occur.
The response is not fully or accurately supported by professional experience or the learning resources. |
The response addresses the potential for action by a criminal justice professional to change depending on a possible defense and explains how and why this may occur.
The response supports reasoning by drawing on professional experience or on the learning resources. |
Hire Fix My GPA to help you complete your online class
References
Provide a citation for each resource you used to write your response to this Assessment. The following citation has been provided as an example:
Mastery Rubric
In order to achieve mastery of this Competency, you must achieve a “2” on every rubric row in addition to meeting the additional expectation indicated in the Mastery Rubric.
Hire Fix My GPA to help you complete your online class
| Mastery Rubric | No | Yes |
| Exceeds Expectations: Connections to Experience | ||
| Compares life experiences and academic knowledge to infer differences, as well as similarities, to concepts/theories/frameworks of fields of study. | Responses do not integrate professional knowledge and experience from the criminal justice discipline when applied to the reporting of crime, the application of crime statistics, and the perceptions between crime occurrence and crime statistics. | Responses integrate professional knowledge and experience from the criminal justice discipline when applied to the reporting of crime, the application of crime statistics, and the perceptions between crime occurrence and crime statistics. |
Professional Skills Assessment
In this Competency Assessment, you will be assessed on the following Professional Skills: Written Communication. These skills count toward your achievement of the Competency and the Professional Skills.
| Written Communication: Write with clarity, coherence, and purpose. | |||
| 0
Not Present |
1
Needs Improvement |
2
Meets Expectations |
|
| LO1: Construct complete and correct sentences. (AWE 2; Sentence Level Skills) | Sentences are incoherent and impede reader’s access to ideas. | Sentences are incomplete and/or include fragments and run-on sentences, limiting reader’s access to ideas. | Sentence structure effectively conveys meaning to the reader. |
| LO2: Demonstrate the effective use of grammar and mechanics. (AWE 2; Sentence Level Skills) | Multiple inaccuracies in grammar and mechanics impede reader’s access to ideas. | Some inaccuracies in grammar and mechanics limit reader’s access to ideas. | Use of grammar and mechanics is straightforward and effectively conveys meaning to reader. |
| LO3: Create cohesive paragraphs with a clear central idea. (AWE 2; Paragraph Level Skills) | Paragraphs, or lack of paragraphs, impede reader’s access to ideas. | Construction of main idea and/or supporting paragraphs limit reader’s access to ideas. | Main idea and/or supporting paragraphs effectively convey meaning to reader. |
| LO4: Use supporting material to support a claim. (AWE 2; Use of Evidence) | Supporting materials are not present. | Supporting material is used inconsistently or inappropriately. | Supporting material is used to enhance meaning. Writing is appropriately paraphrased and uses direct quotes as applicable. |
| LO5: Demonstrate appropriate essay level writing skills, providing transitions between an introduction, body, and conclusion. (AWE 2; Essay Level Skills) | Ideas are disorganized with no/poor transitions. | Ideas are loosely organized with unclear paragraphing and transitions. | Ideas are organized with cohesive transitions. |
| LO6: Identify sources. (AWE 2; Credit to source) | Sources are missing. | Writing inconsistently identifies or misrepresents sources. | Writing clearly identifies the source of non-original material and/or ideas. |
LA2002: Classifications of Defense Answer
To cause a prohibited injury or harm, both the criminal act, actus reus, and criminal intent, mens rea are required to exists in unison (Lippman, 2016). Actus reus is the criminal act that is the result of voluntary bodily movement. In this case, according to Lippman, (2016), it is a physical activity that causes harm to another person or damage property. An omission is also an act of criminal negligence, that qualifies as actus reus. In the case of the Smith family shooting, Mr. Smith’s actus reus is evident by acts of physically abusing Mrs. Smith, and carelessly keeping his guns unlocked and in the open. Jonny’s action of firing the gun at his father does not constitute actus reus, as it was involuntary and in self-defense. In the case of the handicapped parking, Travis actus reus is evident as he shot Paul, who was not armed. In the case of the high school fight, Tony actus reus is evident as he physically hit Jake, even though he was not aiming to hit him. In the case of the troubled son, actus reus is not evident as Tim is diagnosed with schizophrenia, his action may not be voluntary. In the case of the late-night robbery, Edwin’s actus reus is evident as he physically destroyed property as he intended to steal from the old man.
Mens rea refers to the mental state or a guilty mind. In the case of the Smith family shooting, Jonny does not have a guilty mind as his action is in self-defense. However, Mr. Smith having assaulted Mrs. Smith and even threatened her clearly shows the criminal mind or mens rea. In this case, Mr. Smith purposely and knowingly abused and threatened his family. He was negligent and reckless with his guns, which could have provided an opportunity for his
Hire Fix My GPA to help you complete your online class
