Case Study On Bomb Hoaxes

746 Words2 Pages

Legal Assignment

Section 1: Real Life Criminal Case Study
A bomb hoax is when a person has the decision of making the public believe there is a bomb surrounding them or near them which is going to endanger them. The person does this by convincing the people/public that this bomb can or will kill them. To make the person or public believe them they could call the police or military to make it seem more believable.

1. Which section or sections of the Queensland Criminal Code deal with Bomb Hoax’s: The section of the Queensland Criminal code that deals with bomb hoaxes is 321A.

2. What is the maximum penalty in Queensland for making a bomb threat:

A lot of crimes have 2 sentences which are a minimum and a maximum and in this case this crime (bomb hoaxes) has a maximum of 7 years in prison.

3. Detail what makes bomb threats more serious in society today, according to the judge in the case above:
4. The reason bomb hoaxes are more serious in our society nowadays is because of a couple serious reason such as, in the past real bombs have been dropped and have killed millions of people. People that fake these are taken seriously almost every time because of the 911, Bali Bombing and Boston Bombings. So many people have been through pain, grieving, suffering, depression and sadness due to these events. Another reason why bombs in todays society are more dangerous is because the bombs may develop to be more dangerous. And with this happening they can kill bigger masses of people, destroy more places and ruin the place we call home. My proof that my statements are true is supported but Judge Fleur Kingham who stated “in the past ,community concern over bomb threats would not been so pronounced, but today they were now taken very s...

... middle of paper ...

...rts and Defenses: The court which would hear this case is the magistrate court and then if found guilty the district court and no defenses
• Sentencing: maximum penalty 14 years. I think the judge should give 4 years because I think the judge should consider her age and her future life.

Second Case

1. Facts: 20 year old man, shop keepers gone out the back to retrieve something, hides pad under his jackets walks out
2. Offence: Fraudulently (dishonestly) taking property ( that is moveable or capable of being made movable) of another with an intent to permanently deprive the owner of the thing.
3. The law: stealing, s 330, s 331, s 338
4. Courts and Defenses: magistrate court
5. Sentencing: maximum penalty is five years imprisonment. I personally think 5 years is a reasonable time because of the fact he intended to do it and ran so they wouldn’t get caught.

Open Document