Research Paper on:
Australian Public Disturbance Case

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
with. As we do not know which jurisdiction the indecent occurs in we will look at this in a generic manner so it can be applied to any state.  The first we sill look at is a charge of affray under The Crimes Act 1900 Sect 93c (1) as with the  damage to the chairs it may be argued that there could be the cause for this fear, especially with 8 youths present. Under section 93 (with the exception of 93c)  includes violence to property, therefore, the issue is the threat that is created rather than the damage. This may not be a strong case as it would need to be  shown that they were aware that the actions could be seen as threatening (Lexis, 2008). However, we can also look at  the damage to the property and a charge of damaging property under The Crimes Act 1900 Section 195 (1) and (2). (1) is the clause which deal with the purposeful  destruction or damage of property belonging to other people. However it may be more advisable to bring the case under section 195(2) as this deal with damage to property during  public disorder where property is damaged, but this time it may be purposefully, but it may also be as a result of recklessness (Lexis, 2008) In terms of the  public order office it is worth noting that Section 93 of the Crimes Act 1900, dealing with riots, would not apply as there need to be 12 persons present for  that to apply. However we can look at section 4 and 4(a) of the Summary Offences Act. Here there is the charge of offensive behaviour, but we need to look