The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act Essay

The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act - Essay Example These points of law will be discussed later. In the scenario presented we will discuss whether under the DVVA Maureen and Dan are likely to be convicted for causing or allowing the death of a child. The law states that in order to be guilty of the offence four criteria must be met. As Valerie was thrown against the wall and later died of brain damage at the hospital, we can reasonably infer that the medical findings will conclusively prove these injuries and therefore, her death, were a result of an unlawful act. The person or persons committing this act must according to subsections (i) and (ii), be members of the same household as Valerie and have had frequent contact with her. Maureen, Valerie's mother, was the leasee of the flat in which the victim resided and as her biological parent and raising the child it is obvious that both of these criteria were met. Dan, although not the biological father, he does reside and had been residing in the same residence at the time of the offence. Further he was assisting Maureen with rent payments. While cohabitating as husband and wife, a reasonable person would infer that Dan had frequent contact with Valerie as well. ... The person or persons committing this act must according to subsections (i) and (ii), be members of the same household as Valerie and have had frequent contact with her. Maureen, Valerie's mother, was the leasee of the flat in which the victim resided and as her biological parent and raising the child it is obvious that both of these criteria were met. Dan, although not the biological father, he does reside and had been residing in the same residence at the time of the offence. Further he was assisting Maureen with rent payments. While cohabitating as husband and wife, a reasonable person would infer that Dan had frequent contact with Valerie as well. At the time of Valerie's death, both Dan and Maureen were residing together and did have frequent contact with the victim. According to the Children and Young Persons Act 1993 and as further defined in the Children Act 1989.1 Although not the biological parent by nature of the relationship Dan did have a responsibility for Valerie. As explained further in LAWCOM 282 "A person who is presumed to be responsible for a child or young person by virtue of subsection (1)(a) shall not be taken to have ceased to be responsible for him by reason only that he does not have care of him"2 When the police arrived at the flat Dan stated he was sleeping woke to find Maureen standing over Valerie screaming. Maureen recounted that Valerie had been sleeping and she was in the bath at the time of the offence. Upon hearing the commotion when Dan awoke Valerie from her sleep causing the child to cry after which Dan picked up the child and threw her against Maureen, according to her statement to the police, rushed from the bathroom to find the child lying on the floor. Although each had in this