General Thoughts - Legal Studies (1 Viewer)

[4jess7lov]

hey for a summary offence i wrote swearing in public which is ok..but for indictable i wrote homocide...is that correct or is the actual crime murder??? im confused...i think i got the EASIEST question in the exam wrong!!! :S and also for economic crimes do you think it matters if you didnt mention theft and larceny..all i did was like fraud, insider trading, embezzlement etc..i forgot theft/larceny was an economic crime?? if you talked enuf abt the others do u think they care?

 

[Azreil]

Yeah, I was just short on a positive. I couldn't think of an extra one because I stupidly decided to skip over that section of the syllabus.

Hey, and I heard they don't mark any writing that goes over the alotted lines?

Heard that, but I don't believe it. I was told by a marker that I could get a writing booklet and write 5 pages for a 3 mark question if I wanted to. It would be dumb because some people have massive handwriting and if you interpret the question wrong first, you can't white it out-- you have to cross it out and start again.

 

[knots&crosses]

embezzlement etc..i forgot theft/larceny was an economic crime?? if you talked enuf abt the others do u think they care?

I dont think they care if it didnt matter to your comparison with the other crime.

How did everyone set out that question? I talked about the similarities and differences in terms of the creation of legislation, the criminal procedure and punishments. I was a bit shocked when I first saw it, as i had never seen something like that before. It was weird...

You can't say for sure until the marking guidelines are released. I have no idea what I wrote for that question >> I remember going way over the lines but have no memory of the actual content I got down. 3/3 is the safer way to go but who knows

I wrote over the lines too but had 3 positives and 1 negative. I said the positives are:
It enshrines human rights
People are aware of their rights
Fulfilling International Obligation

Negaives
Incorporating into the constitution difficult to remove should our values change or the law becomes outdated, only with referendum. Example, U.S gun laws.

 

[4jess7lov]

I dont think they care if it didnt matter to your comparison with the other crime.

How did everyone set out that question? I talked about the similarities and differences in terms of the creation of legislation, the criminal procedure and punishments. I was a bit shocked when I first saw it, as i had never seen something like that before. It was weird...

yeh tbh this one was an easy question..but very hard to structure. i did it by mentioning all the punishments and how they meet the objectives of punishment thus sorta showing how they achive justice...but i just kept on repeating myself over and over..kept on saying this makes the offender hav to report to a probation order thus the victim feels compensated and stuff like that...but in the sylubus theres all this other stuff abt resource efficency and all the dot points which i guess you could have talked about.

how did ppl say the penalties achieved justice?? like wat arguments did u do to evaluate their effectivness??

 

[knots&crosses]

how did ppl say the penalties achieved justice?? like wat arguments did u do to evaluate their effectivness??

Luckily, in class, my teacher had us write all the positives and negatives to each penalty. So i didnt use the actual effectiveness headings for individuals and society, but rather went about how for example, A fine does not achieve justice for a community because it allows for reoffending. i used the example of speeding, with the new laws about crushing speeders cars, proving that fines alone do not provide jusitce even though they put money back into society.

And for imprisonment I said it was just for the community but not for the individual because of the harshness of penalties. used the Bilal Skaff case who had his Maximum sentence decreased by 15 years because it was 'unjust."

so thats basically how i interpreted the question, doing that for every other penalty, I hope its right, because, um its 12 marks.

 

[4jess7lov]

Luckily, in class, my teacher had us write all the positives and negatives to each penalty. So i didnt use the actual effectiveness headings for individuals and society, but rather went about how for example, A fine does not achieve justice for a community because it allows for reoffending. i used the example of speeding, with the new laws about crushing speeders cars, proving that fines alone do not provide jusitce even though they put money back into society.

And for imprisonment I said it was just for the community but not for the individual because of the harshness of penalties. used the Bilal Skaff case who had his Maximum sentence decreased by 15 years because it was 'unjust."

so thats basically how i interpreted the question, doing that for every other penalty, I hope its right, because, um its 12 marks.

you didnt need to use actual laws did you? it jsut says evaluate them...so you dont need to. do you?

 

[prieste]

yeh that was so effing hard!

favretd i dunno how u got 8 essays done but u did well i did world order, family, environmtnal, consumers, workplace and then ran out of time


and i totally wanted the HSC examiners! THEY WERE SO hot they were like 60 years old and jus were begging for menopausal roots!

roflkebab

 

[fleck27]

Im just sooo glad there was no current criminal justice issue...12 marks down the drain for meee

 

[knots&crosses]

you didnt need to use actual laws did you? it jsut says evaluate them...so you dont need to. do you?

Lol no, i just tried to show off...

 

[Muchi]

multiple choice was sweet, short answers were sweet, crime was sweet, family was sweet but consumers!!!!? OMG i was like how the eff am i going to answer that!!! i just threw in some random cases and legislation.. as i was doing it i was thinkin that i got a band 6 for sure,,, untill i hit that question n now im thinkin band 4,, if that!

Which option did you choose? Because I agree morality and ethics was a shithouse of a question. But the legal institutions question was quite good. For Consumers at least.

 

[pen-el-ope]

Legal was the third exam I have done (after the two english papers) and I really think it just goes to show how generic the questions are becoming.

The qeustions for English paper 2 were so generic! You really could have planned them and it turns out it was the same for legal!

My teacher always goes on about how for legal you really shouldnt prepare them but i think i could have and gone much better.

I think loads of people in the state are going to go extremely well in this paper..
hmmm

 

[SirSeanW]

I'm just starting the HSC now and wow it sounds pretty hard from what everyone has said so far...I know im going to be learning about all of it but can anyone give me some pointers to getting through the legal test...

Thanks

 

[westlife]

piss easy in my opinion... but depends on the focus studies i guess... one of ours was global environment and that was the easiest freaking set of questions i've ever seen... before my exam, i was aiming for 90+... after i reckon i have a good chance at:
20 - L&S/HR
25 - Crime
23 - Family
25 - Global Environment...

i was shiting myself with the global environment i found it the most boring shit ever.....got in there and they couldn't of handed me better question then b).

i usually go better in family then global but i think it be different this. i think i'll get 20ish - i'm not that great at essay writing!
overall an alright exam, crime andshort answer on l/s, shit esay!!

 

[nirvanafreak02]

I'm just starting the HSC now and wow it sounds pretty hard from what everyone has said so far...I know im going to be learning about all of it but can anyone give me some pointers to getting through the legal test...

Thanks

take a leak before the exam because 3 hours is really long

learn the syllabus inside out if nothing else

 

[nirvanafreak02]

i was shiting myself with the global environment i found it the most boring shit ever.....got in there and they couldn't of handed me better question then b).

yeah that question just pretty much asked you to bag out international instruments/conferences... all i really did was use 1 million examples of how/why they suck... "they raise awareness, but that's about it"

 

[patty4848]

i was shiting myself with the global environment i found it the most boring shit ever.....got in there and they couldn't of handed me better question then b).

i usually go better in family then global but i think it be different this. i think i'll get 20ish - i'm not that great at essay writing!
overall an alright exam, crime andshort answer on l/s, shit esay!!

i agree. global was always my best so i was actually really annoyed that they gave us those two questions because i reckon everyone will do pretty well in that... hahaha would've been nice for an extremely hard one!

I assumed that most of the candidature would have done b) because that was just plain easy... so i did a)... they were practically the same except that a) asked you to talk about domestic legislation as well

 

[4jess7lov]

guys is homocide an indictable offence or do u need to specify murder??????? cause homocide can be legal (self defence etc)...do you think i got that wrong????? easiest q of the exam and i stuff it

 

[liljd001]

Probably a mark for each point. It was outta six. So 3 marks for for and 3 marks for against.

What were your focuses?

I have Family and World Order.
Reckon I did better in WO though.

Yea, we did Family and World Order.

I think I almost owned the family question b. Thankyou BoS!! World Order, ohhh gosh. I hate the fact I didn't study it as much as everything else =S

Crime was soooo good. I studying freaking sexual assault (Skaf Brothers) that much in prep for a 'current crim issue', then they didn't even ask it! Aww well, good all round.

Multiple choice = A JOKE.

Law and society- I stuffed up the natural law q. I'm such a dumbass. The rest was good. We had the exact same Bill of Rights q in our 1/2 yearly, so it was a gift.

 

[ALGALELE]

I dont think they care if it didnt matter to your comparison with the other crime.

How did everyone set out that question? I talked about the similarities and differences in terms of the creation of legislation, the criminal procedure and punishments. I was a bit shocked when I first saw it, as i had never seen something like that before. It was weird...



I wrote over the lines too but had 3 positives and 1 negative. I said the positives are:
It enshrines human rights
People are aware of their rights
Fulfilling International Obligation

Negaives
Incorporating into the constitution difficult to remove should our values change or the law becomes outdated, only with referendum. Example, U.S gun laws.

another argument is enshrining a bill of rights in australia will be like a garantee of our rights in the future..as it is very hard to change a bill of rights...i mean who knows maybe a new evil government wil come and make statues which will override all the statutes protecting our hr's? correct me if im wrong.

 

[trots24680]

I think i did ok overall!! Multiple choice was crap, and essays were easy because they were so broad so i had heaps to talk about.

Did anyone else have troble with comparing the two types of crime. I know it is an easy question but i didn't know what to compare and it was worth 8 fucking marks!!!

and has anyone else found that these exams seem to be heaps easier than any other past HSC? Why?

*Good luck everyone for all the other exams* :wave: