Loading study pack…
Loading study pack…
Loading topic preview…
7 building blocks · blurt the topic, then mark it block by block against the answer key.
Topic preview
Preview the first part of the topic. Unlock SQE2 Playbook to answer prompts, get marked against the answer key, repair gaps, and carry the topic into review.
6 of 7 shown
Opposing Omar Bell's bail application, the prosecution says he may interfere with a witness after allegedly asking a friend to deliver a warning. Turn that concern into the relevant statutory exception by identifying the predicted event, the evidence supporting substantial grounds and the precise remand outcome sought, rather than calling release generally unsafe.
Omar Bell was already subject to a direct non-contact term when he allegedly asked two friends to approach the complainant. Acting for the prosecution on bail, draw the permissible inference from the indirect method and explain why simply repeating a direct-only condition would not control the identified interference mechanism.
CCTV and recovered property apparently support the serious robbery charge against Omar Bell. Defence counsel says seriousness is not a ground for remand. Opposing bail for the prosecution, explain how seriousness and apparent evidence strength affect incentive and predicted risk, while accepting that neither factor proves a statutory exception by itself.
Omar Bell allegedly used friends near the complainant's workplace to pass on a warning. Assess for the prosecution whether daily reporting, an evening curfew, a workplace exclusion zone and a ban on direct or indirect contact actually interrupt that mechanism, identifying both the protection each offers and any material gap.
The judge proposes that Omar Bell live forty miles away, wear an electronic tag and have no direct or indirect witness contact. Prosecuting the bail opposition, answer whether remand remains necessary by identifying any residual means of interference, using the alleged third-party circumvention, and conceding if the combined package now manages the risk.
If the court accepts the prosecution's interference case against Omar Bell, close by asking it to identify the statutory exception, the factual reasons and why proposed conditions are inadequate. If remand is refused, formulate the minimum fallback terms—residence, monitoring, exclusion and indirect-contact protection—needed to address the same risk.
The full topic unlocks with SQE2 Playbook, including the remaining prompts and answer-key marking.
New to the method? See why Paper Tiger beats rereading