Section I - Multiple Choice (1 Viewer)

[HKK]

For the 'who decides on question on fact' pretty sure thats the jury but I chose te judge the jury decides on the question of fact while the judge makes sure the rules of the court are being followed, advises jury of legal questions and shit. Can't believe I got that wrong -_- some M/C were really vague.

 

[crazybea]

For the 'who decides on question on fact' pretty sure thats the jury but I chose te judge the jury decides on the question of fact while the judge makes sure the rules of the court are being followed, advises jury of legal questions and shit. Can't believe I got that wrong -_- some M/C were really vague.

no
the answers judge

 

[funkygirl59]

i dont think 10 is right
im pretty sure they have to be charged 1st

everything else is correct

looking at 18-19/20

I thought 8 was D????

and 15 i still think isn't set in stone

far out these questions were hORRIBLE

 

[funkygirl59]

also i think 7 is B i.e. conspiracy AND robbery
cos he committed both
he might just be charged only with robbery, since that's what he ended up doing. But i think they wanted a mention of conspiracy, spesh since they went to the effort to write 'alex AND dale planned...' etc

and this:
http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/conspiracy.html


and CRAPPPP i just realized for 8 --->>> i didn't read how shane was 12! SO STUPID

 

[crazybea]

you are only charged with robbery or conspiracy

conspiracy is preliminary crime

if they are stopped short of the acting out the crime, then thats what they would be charged with

if they act it out, they would be charged with robbery only

 

[wogboy23]

Hi guys -new here but did the legal multiple choice yesterday. I have a few queries
What I got:
1)D
2)B
3)A
4)C
5)A
6)B
7)B (it is both conspiracy and robbery as they are both different and conspiracy actually means that the crime will be carried out (it doesn't necessarily mean it's botched like attempt)
8) D (this is what I feel is correct because both were involved one way or another in a robbery which is an indictable offence and well end up in a court above Local)
9)A
10)C
11)C
12)A
13)D
14)B (I CAN'T BELIEVE I PUT D -misread the question)
15) I said it was B - as the process of ratification has already been carried out according to the question, wouldn't the effect be those human rights would be punishable in Australia?? - I mean this suggests that Federal Parliament have passed law echoing or amending existing law in enacting this legisaltion
16)D
17) A (strict liability offence)
18)C
19)A
20)B

 

[crazybea]

some of urs are wrong

 

[wogboy23]

which? oh woops, I didn't see the ages of the property offenders properly damn

 

[milomarc93]

Definitely A - freedom of religion - Section 116 of the Constitution.

I think you're wrong, freedom of religion is a civil, political right. The right to education is a 'human right'. Question 9 is D

 

[crazybea]

I think you're wrong, freedom of religion is a civil, political right. The right to education is a 'human right'. Question 9 is D

education is not protected in the constitution

clearly remember my teacher saying

 

[milomarc93]

Whoops, I just checked that out- you're right. My apologies. Darn, I associated the word 'human right' with the topics we studied in the first section of the hr syllabus.


Gah, I'm looking at 18ish now

 

[Simone23]

Hopefully it will scale well, because everyone is saying different things, even in extended response i believe people would have said completely different things because the questions didn't allow us to link it to headings on the syllabus. I think it sucks that we never get to know our raw marks!

 

[wogboy23]

Hopefully it will scale well, because everyone is saying different things, even in extended response i believe people would have said completely different things because the questions didn't allow us to link it to headings on the syllabus. I think it sucks that we never get to know our raw marks!

Some syllabus headings you could apply eg. family - "Evaluate the effectiveness of the law assisting family memebrs affected by relationship breakdown"
Straight off the syllabus on the second section i.e. simple layout
domestic violence
divorce and its consequences - property and children - eg. the various laws that still apply for child even after separation/education/Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction
courts (and here you could link different areas of the syllabus throughout like surrogacy (brief) but also same-sex) and finally ADR - counselling/mediation/CCP and a discussion of both the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of the Shared Parental Responsibilites Act and the new bill currently debated in parliament (so basically reflecting the contemporary issue of care and protection of children even after breakdown)

 

[wogboy23]

Same for consumers - "Why is it hard for consumers to achieve justice"
I mentioned non-statutory controls on advertising then basically followed the scaffold of the 2nd section of the syllabus - "Consumer remedies and redress"
self-help
state organisations - Legal Aid, OFT
federal organisations - ASIC, ACCC and linked throughout credit, product cert and technology
courts/individual and class action as well as ADR - CJC's and CTTT
just talking about the effectiveness of each but mainly the ineffectiveness in providing justice
my main underpinning idea was the power imbalance existent between impressionable consumers and unscrupulous businesses as well as the consumer's lack of knowledge, skills and expertise
essays were pretty straightforward I reckon

 

[wogboy23]

http://www.marymonson.co.uk/organised-crime.php

"Every organised and well run operation requires planning and coordination of workers, and the same is the case for organised criminal activity. It is no surprise that cases involving alleged organised crime, whether they are gun running, drug importation, or fake passport production are often charged as conspiracy to commit the offence alleged."

 

[Simone23]

Some syllabus headings you could apply eg. family - "Evaluate the effectiveness of the law assisting family memebrs affected by relationship breakdown"
Straight off the syllabus on the second section i.e. simple layout
domestic violence
divorce and its consequences - property and children - eg. the various laws that still apply for child even after separation/education/Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction
courts (and here you could link different areas of the syllabus throughout like surrogacy (brief) but also same-sex) and finally ADR - counselling/mediation/CCP and a discussion of both the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of the Shared Parental Responsibilites Act and the new bill currently debated in parliament (so basically reflecting the contemporary issue of care and protection of children even after breakdown)

I agree, i luckily didn't get stuck like other people on here and in family spoke of divorce, property and children. I'm just saying many people got stuck so the responses are going to be from a high standard to a low standard, hence hopefully it scales well. But then again it's like English, different module questions are harder as i know some people who didn't study a selected speech which scaling may not help them because i had an easier question, so it is the same with the options i suppose.

 

[wogboy23]

^Agreed. Depends on scaling. Would have been nice to see a contemporary issue question though specifically for family and consumers. Too many tricks in this year's paper and to be honest, I don't see why they would do that.

 

[premiumcbc]

I think you're wrong, freedom of religion is a civil, political right. The right to education is a 'human right'. Question 9 is D

Just because freedom of religion is a civil and political right, does not make it not a 'human right'. Otherwise the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights would not be considered International Humanitarian Law or even appear in the Human Rights topic. Also it is stated explicitly in http://www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/human_rights_dialogue/aus_law.html that freedom of religion is protected in the constitution, whereas none of the others are. Therefore you are wrong simply by process of elimination.

 

[wogboy23]

Basically 99% Sure These Are Right Now:
1. D
2. B
3. A
4. C
5. A
6. B
7. D
8. C
9. A
10. C (Although I did B - not 100% sure depends on the wording of the question)
11. C
12. A
13. D (DON'T KNOW WHY I DID A!!!!)
14. B
15. C
16. D
17. A
18. C
19. A
20. B

I think i got 18 if I'm seriously lucky maybe more.

7 is B (conspiracy to rob and robbery as it was planned and one can be charged with both) and 15 is B as the statement displays ratification has already taken place - therefore it's B

 

[premiumcbc]

It would be robbery only because he assisted in the crime and through process of elimination it has to be robbery. That said, this leads onto the next question as it is both conspiracy and robbery, because the key word "planned" implies a conspiracy. A conspiracy was evident coupled with the fact that it did happen so my teachers and I concluded conspiracy AND robbery.

Did you just contradict yourself? You said robbery only, then stated conspiracy and robbery.

I've stated this in the exam discussion thread, but I'll post again here.

Well, I was looking at http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/a-z/conspiracy.html.

And it states 'One person may be charged with and convicted of both conspiracy and the underlying crime based on the same circumstances.'

Someone also said that conspiracy was a 'preliminary' offence. I think this is only the case when the act is not committed. However, if it is it doesn't fall under preliminary. Thus, that is why 'Conspiracy' category of crime.

I think it was B