Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Aggravated robbery, trial & sentence

the surface area of the average brick is 79cm^2

tristian low

on 4 December 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Aggravated robbery, trial & sentence

Tristian & Brandon Aggravated Robbery 1. The crime against the accused is aggravated robbery (other). A robbery is the unlawful taking of property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. This offence involves the use of a weapon other than a firearm and may also involve the infliction of injury or violence of the person. This is classed as a criminal crime/offence against the person and property. This case will be heard in the District criminal court and will not have a jury, only a judge. 2. The people involved in the crime were the offender
and the victim. The offender was a male of Caucasian appearance and is 19 years of age who is accused of threatening the victim with a knife while asking for cash from the till. The victim is an employee of a
petrol station at Kilburn 4. As shown in the video there is only slight recognisable resemblance between the victim and the assailant, the height and build resembles the defendant however he is of average height and build, so of course there are those who look like him, and the facial features have no distinct similarities that proves the defendant is the assailant. For all we know someone of the same height, build and skin tone as the defendant is the assailant. There is no absolute proof that the defendant committed the crime. 3. The prosecution will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused entered the service station with the sole intent of stealing money (Mens Rea) and that the accused left the service station with $450 in cash taken from the till (Actus Reus). There is video evidence of the crime taken by CC TV in the store at the time of the robbery. This video clearly shows the crime being committed and the face of the offender can be seen in some parts. The prosecution will show that it is clearly the accused committing the crime; also the accused has no alibi to prove that he was not at the crime scene at the time of the robbery. The victim’s identification of the perpetrator also matches the defendant’s appearance. The victim has stated that he was threatened with a knife and forced to hand over $450 from the till. The accused is well known by police and has been convicted of robbery and drink driving in the past. He is known to be very aggressive and is an alcoholic. 5. After considering arguments from both the prosecution and defence the defendant is found not guilty by the judge. This verdict was reached because although It seemed like the defendant was guilty there is no evidence to prove it was actually him not just someone who looked similar. The defence does not have to prove that the defendant is not guilty only prove that he might not be the one who committed the crime and this was accomplished. 6. Criminal offence descriptions N.d., Western Australia Poliece, accessed 14 November 2012, <http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeOffenceDescriptions/tabid/1213/Default.aspx>.
Robbery 22, AUG 12, Judicial Commission of New South Wales, accessed 14 November 2012, <http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/sentencing/robbery.html#p20-220>.
Criminal (Local Court) (NSW) - Step-by-Step Legal Practice Guide and Precedents 2012, Smokeball, accessed 14 November 2012, <http://www.smokeball.com.au/ProductInfo/157/Index/258609>. The job of the barrister for defence is to put doubt in the judge’s mind. The defendant does not have to be proven not guilty, there only needs to be a chance that they are not guilty. Usually the barrister tries to find holes or uncertainties in the prosecutor’s case. This can be hard because they have to react and think quickly to do this well. The job of the prosecutor is to convince the judge that the accused is guilty of the crime. To do this they study the evidence and try to make a convincing case. It must be proved that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, not just that they are most likely guilty of the crime, it must be certain that the accused is guilty. The Judge’s job is to listen to both sides of the case and consider whether or not they think the defendant is guilty. If they find the defendant guilty then the judge must set the punishment, for example a fine or jail time. The judge also helps to keep order in the court room during the trial.
Full transcript