Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences Practice Questions

Free NPPF Step 2 Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences questions with full answers, for Sergeant and Inspector candidates.

20+ questions in the full bankType A format

About this topic

Racially and religiously aggravated offences are versions of existing offences with a higher maximum sentence. The exam tests when an offence is aggravated and which offences have an aggravated form.

Know the two ways aggravation can be shown (demonstrated hostility or motivation), the timing rule, and the offences covered by ss.29 to 32 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

Key legislation and cases

Crime and Disorder Act 1998, ss.28-32

Worked examples

Try each question before opening the answer. Every option is explained, because the exam usually turns on why the near-miss answers are wrong.

Worked question 1 of 2Standard

Cole punches Rashid during an argument outside a pub. Cole shouts a racial insult at Rashid immediately after the punch is thrown. DC Webb is considering the appropriate charge. Which of the following is correct?

AThe racial element must pre-date the assault for an aggravated charge - as the insult came after the punch the basic offence is the appropriate charge
BCole may be charged with racially aggravated assault - the racial hostility can be demonstrated immediately before or after the offence as well as during it
CA racially aggravated charge requires the prosecution to prove racial hostility was the primary motivation for the assault not merely a feature of it
DThe charge is racially aggravated only if Rashid can positively identify the words used - without that identification only the basic offence is available

Show answer and explanation

Answer: B

Under s.28 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 an offence is racially aggravated if the offender demonstrates racial hostility at the time of committing it, or immediately before or after. The insult shouted immediately after the punch satisfies this requirement. The racial hostility need not be the primary or sole motivation - wholly or partly is the statutory test. The victim's identification of the specific words used is evidentially helpful but is not a legal prerequisite for the aggravated charge.

s.28 Crime and Disorder Act 1998

s.28(1): an offence is racially aggravated if at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates towards the victim hostility based on the victim's membership of a racial group, or if the offence is motivated wholly or partly by hostility towards members of a racial group.

A: s.28 expressly includes demonstrations of hostility immediately before or after the offence, not just during it. The insult coming after the punch still falls within the statutory window.
C: The prosecution does not need to prove racial hostility was the primary motivation. s.28 provides that the offence is aggravated where motivated wholly or partly by racial hostility - partial motivation is sufficient.
D: The victim's identification of specific words is one form of evidence but not the only route. Witness evidence, CCTV or other sources can establish the racial element without the victim's specific identification.

Worked question 2 of 2Standard

Trent spray-paints racist graffiti on the wall of a mosque targeting the Muslim community. DC Osei is considering the appropriate charge. Which of the following is correct?

ATrent can only be charged with criminal damage under s.1 CDA 1971 - racially aggravated criminal damage requires physical damage to a person not just to property
BRacially aggravated criminal damage is not a standalone offence - the racial element can only be raised as an aggravating factor at sentencing for the basic s.1 offence
CTrent may be charged with racially aggravated criminal damage under s.30 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 - the offence is made out where criminal damage is committed and the offender demonstrates racial or religious hostility
DThe charge must be religiously aggravated criminal damage not racially aggravated as the graffiti targets a religious building and a religious community

Show answer and explanation

Answer: C

s.30 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 creates a specific offence of racially or religiously aggravated criminal damage. The offence is made out where a person commits criminal damage under s.1 CDA 1971 and at the time or immediately before or after demonstrates racial or religious hostility, or the offence is motivated wholly or partly by racial or religious hostility. The charge under s.30 is a standalone offence carrying a higher maximum sentence than the basic criminal damage offence.

s.30 Crime and Disorder Act 1998

s.30(1): a person is guilty of racially or religiously aggravated criminal damage if he commits an offence under s.1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 and the offence is racially or religiously aggravated within the meaning of s.28 of this Act.

A: Racially aggravated criminal damage under s.30 CDA 1998 concerns damage to property - not injury to persons. Physical harm to a person is not an element of this offence.
B: s.30 CDA 1998 creates a standalone offence. The racial or religious element is not merely a sentencing aggravator - it forms a distinct and more seriously regarded charge.
D: The offence under s.30 covers both racial and religious aggravation. Targeting the Muslim community can constitute both racial and religious hostility - the charge need not be exclusively one or the other.

Practise every Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences question

The full bank has 20+ questions on Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences and over 1,100 across the whole syllabus, each with the statute and an explanation for every option. £29 for 6 months.

Get full access Try 5 free questions