ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE Business Studies => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE Legal Studies => Topic started by: xtremeownage on November 10, 2010, 05:55:22 pm
-
Share your thoughts..
-
It was awesome and easy! :D
-
n2b. what did you write for the 1 mark questions? my class have all said it could really be supreme, county or even magistrates. not a great question imo
-
everyone in my school wrote Magistrates... culpable driving isn't that serious of an offence to go to county or supreme! lol
-
Wasn't as hard as previous years. I thought I did alright, can't wait to get results.
-
culpable driving usually results in death from reckless driving, so it can be county court. however the question was worded badly and teachers will probably appeal to vcaa
-
do you think if appealed that they will accept all answers? and will they give consequential for the next question aswell?
-
Midyear accounting exam had a very poorly worded question and everyone got 2 out of 2 marks for it.
Perhaps, the one mark questions will be the same.
I answered 'Magistrate's Court' for two reasons:
150 hours community service order? For killing someone? Not exactly justified.
In one of the previous exams, a question similar came up that said something along the lines of: [Name] was convicted of Culpable Driving CAUSING SERIOUS INJURY. What court would he appear in? I figured that, since the word culpable directly defines as: blameworthy, then perhaps he was just driving recklessly and was found guilty.
The combination of these two lead me to believe that culpable driving, whilst an indictable offence, was heard summarily in the Magistrate's Court and that's how his penalty was not that high.
That question, the question about the person giving the sanction and the other forms of sanctions and their purpose all relating to Carl should be given 100% - perhaps not the sanctions and purpose one; because it was kind of not related - but I did mention the fact that Carl's sentence would not be more than two years as it was heard in the Magistrate's court so, if those two one-markers were given full marks, then I should not be blamed for that slight mishap.
Otherwise, alright. I suck at doing the 8 and 10 markers - probably got 6 and 8 respectively.
Heard mixed reviews from my class - most said they didn't finish, which is disappointing for them, but good for those that want higher marks? :P
-
Also how did everyone go on that question about tribunals and effective mechanism for the resolution of disputes = 5marks? that's the only thing i think i lost 3 or 2 marks in? Also what 10 marker did u guys choose? i chose 10 b, explained jury, role of judge, parties, rules of evidence and procedure, standard and burden of proof in the adversary , then said i partially agree to the statement = then i gave one strength + one weakness on ea of the different functions in adversary + the suggested change = relation of rules of evidence and procedure.
-
Also, what do u guys think will be a low A or low A+ on the exam for this year? i believe i got above 50/60.
-
For the tribunals and effective access to the mechanism of dispute resolution, I just discussed 5 strengths of tribunals that relate to the effective access. E.g. cost of legal representation for litigation, where tribunals may not require legal representation; cost of court and administration fees aren't as expensive in tribunals - i.e. approximately $35.00 for access to VCAT; less formalities (meaning more informal than litigation) of tribunals, showing people that caution and fear of taking civil action is not as extreme; less pressure on courts due to minor cases being taken to tribunals rather than litigation, allowing for more complex and major cases having the appropriate access to courts; and one other that alludes me. D:
I chose B for the 10-marker. You have to note that the jury is not an aspect of the adversarial system - though I'm pretty sure you could have talked about it, since the inquisatorial system doesn't use juries at all. Explained what the adversary system is, talked about role of the judge, parties, rules of evidence and procedure, standard and burden of proof, gave one strength to three out of the four I did, as well as two weaknesses over all, then gave my suggested change = judge being able to question witnesses during the trial to ask questions that might not be covered by either party and could show more information to make a decision. Gave my opinion at the start. Ended up writing 500-600 words in 20 minutes, suprisingly. Just blurted it all out on the page. :P
-
Heard mixed reviews from my class - most said they didn't finish, which is disappointing for them, but good for those that want higher marks? :P
I didn't quite finish! I was doing the whole 'add an extra paragraph to scrapy answers to ensure you get the mark' thing, and I had one word to go in a paragraph... The word was 'invalid' the sentence reads 'the high court can declare infringing legislation...' (the question about restrictions on the commonwealth- only like two marks if i remember correctly).
-
Heard mixed reviews from my class - most said they didn't finish, which is disappointing for them, but good for those that want higher marks? :P
I didn't quite finish! I was doing the whole 'add an extra paragraph to scrapy answers to ensure you get the mark' thing, and I had one word to go in a paragraph... The word was 'invalid' the sentence reads 'the high court can declare infringing legislation...' (the question about restrictions on the commonwealth- only like two marks if i remember correctly).
I'm sure the examiner will understand what you're trying to say, buddy. Don't stress too much. I finished but overall, with some really crappy answers. That question that you're talking about there I talked a whole lot of crap. It was along the lines of:
"One restriction on the law-making of the Commonwealth Parliament in the Commonwealth Constitution Act is the limits on jurisdiction the Commonwealth Parliament has, as set out by the division of powers. The Commonwealth Constitution states that the Commonwealth Parliament must not create laws in residual areas of power, which are left to the states' jurisdiction. For example: the power to create laws to do with primary and secondary schooling."
Along those lines, at least. Poor effort. I had no idea what to write.
-
Heard mixed reviews from my class - most said they didn't finish, which is disappointing for them, but good for those that want higher marks? :P
I didn't quite finish! I was doing the whole 'add an extra paragraph to scrapy answers to ensure you get the mark' thing, and I had one word to go in a paragraph... The word was 'invalid' the sentence reads 'the high court can declare infringing legislation...' (the question about restrictions on the commonwealth- only like two marks if i remember correctly).
I'm sure the examiner will understand what you're trying to say, buddy. Don't stress too much. I finished but overall, with some really crappy answers. That question that you're talking about there I talked a whole lot of crap. It was along the lines of:
"One restriction on the law-making of the Commonwealth Parliament in the Commonwealth Constitution Act is the limits on jurisdiction the Commonwealth Parliament has, as set out by the division of powers. The Commonwealth Constitution states that the Commonwealth Parliament must not create laws in residual areas of power, which are left to the states' jurisdiction. For example: the power to create laws to do with primary and secondary schooling."
Along those lines, at least. Poor effort. I had no idea what to write.
Yeah, they'll know what I was on about. Anyway, I was adding detail that the question didn't realy require, so it's no biggie.
-
Also how did everyone go on that question about tribunals and effective mechanism for the resolution of disputes = 5marks? that's the only thing i think i lost 3 or 2 marks in? Also what 10 marker did u guys choose? i chose 10 b, explained jury, role of judge, parties, rules of evidence and procedure, standard and burden of proof in the adversary , then said i partially agree to the statement = then i gave one strength + one weakness on ea of the different functions in adversary + the suggested change = relation of rules of evidence and procedure.
I dont remember this question entirely as I did not do it but i thought the question was all about the adversary system?? If it was I was taught not to talk about juries as they are not a part of the adversary system....
-
Im pretty sure it was all about the adversary? AS Jury is not a part of the Adversary ! also a restriction i said for commonwealth = can make laws on religion, then explained. (also about the tribunal question i only gave 1 strength + 1 weakness and related it to effective access for mechanisms - but i wrote the strength/weakness in full detail covering the whole page - there would i be expecting to get ? 3/4 out of 5? my strength = adversary is less expensive, and for weakness = starting to become costly, due to more reliance on legal representative. I did it in detail so would i be able to achieve 3 or 4 out of 5?
ALSO - the question on police powers/ individual rights after arrest i wrote in detail = person right, that they can apply for bail,they get released from custody.. etc and bail does not have to be granted in certain cirumcstance. However for police powers i wrote = they can fingerprint person aged 15+ (10-15 childrens court order) and 15-16 must have parent guardian there.
So how do u think that sound guys?
-
Im pretty sure it was all about the adversary? AS Jury is not a part of the Adversary ! also a restriction i said for commonwealth = can make laws on religion, then explained. (also about the tribunal question i only gave 1 strength + 1 weakness and related it to effective access for mechanisms - but i wrote the strength/weakness in full detail covering the whole page - there would i be expecting to get ? 3/4 out of 5? my strength = adversary is less expensive, and for weakness = starting to become costly, due to more reliance on legal representative. I did it in detail so would i be able to achieve 3 or 4 out of 5?
ALSO - the question on police powers/ individual rights after arrest i wrote in detail = person right, that they can apply for bail,they get released from custody.. etc and bail does not have to be granted in certain cirumcstance. However for police powers i wrote = they can fingerprint person aged 15+ (10-15 childrens court order) and 15-16 must have parent guardian there.
So how do u think that sound guys?
Yeah, it was all about the adversary. Nothing about the jury for that question.
For your strength/weakness of tribunals - I'd say you'd probably get a 3 because you explained in depth. But the less you write, whilst still getting your point across, the more knowledge you are showing. If you're succinct about the link and the explanation and can do it in as little words as possible whilst still getting the full effect, you'll get more marks than someone who flutters about trying to explain it in a lot of words.
What you wrote about police/individual rights sounds about right. I used the right to silence so as to not incriminate himself, even though the individual has to give their name and address upon request. For the police power, I did the right to DNA sampling with permission or court order. Didn't explain the age barriers thing, hope it still counts. It was still only an identify question, and did not ask to explain. So, meh.
-
The only exam I'm actually confident with.
-
What you wrote about police/individual rights sounds about right. I used the right to silence so as to not incriminate himself, even though the individual has to give their name and address upon request. For the police power, I did the right to DNA sampling with permission or court order. Didn't explain the age barriers thing, hope it still counts. It was still only an identify question, and did not ask to explain. So, meh.
I used right to silence too... I did the two most obvious ones: Right to silence and the police power to interview a suspect for a reasonable time... i thought everyone would have done those two.
In right to silence I had to stop myself from talking about coersive questioning orders, i realy realy wanted to, but i knew i would get no marks for it.
-
hehe, im pretty happy with my performance :) will be happy if i get 50/60 but i think i might do better XD
-
What you wrote about police/individual rights sounds about right. I used the right to silence so as to not incriminate himself, even though the individual has to give their name and address upon request. For the police power, I did the right to DNA sampling with permission or court order. Didn't explain the age barriers thing, hope it still counts. It was still only an identify question, and did not ask to explain. So, meh.
I used right to silence too... I did the two most obvious ones: Right to silence and the police power to interview a suspect for a reasonable time... i thought everyone would have done those two.
In right to silence I had to stop myself from talking about coersive questioning orders, i realy realy wanted to, but i knew i would get no marks for it.
I was going to do the reasonable questioning time as well, but then thought they may not actually question him because they've already arrested him - must have enough evidence for a conviction if they arrest and charge him. Regardless, I'm still sure about what is meant by arrest - taking them into custody and questioning them, or preparing them for being charged?
But I lol'd when I read coercive questioning orders the first time. Still wouldn't consider using it for that question, though.
-
Magistrate or County Court?
-
Magistrate or County Court?
could be both? lol
-
Magistrate or County Court?
could be both? lol
Mixed results from everyone. Got no idea who is right or who is wrong?
-
Magistrate or County Court?
could be both? lol
Mixed results from everyone. Got no idea who is right or who is wrong?
Im fairly sure Its County, my teacher agrees
-
Magistrate or County Court?
I believe it is both!
-
The answer is the County Court...
But inside sources say it could be either and they'll mark it as such.
-
Checked with my teacher he said that it's Magistrate for sure and I trust him.
-
County was my answer.
-
What would happen if You Werent Able to list any Specific Sections of the constitution but was able to Explain how the Constitution was able to effect the question?
Would you be penalised?
-
What would happen if You Werent Able to list any Specific Sections of the constitution but was able to Explain how the Constitution was able to effect the question?
Would you be penalised?
Which question was this? Human rights or restrictions on the parliament?
The study design says you don't have to know the section numbers, and you don't have to use them to get full marks BUT using the section numbers sends a clear message to the examiner that you know your stuff and you have done your study in detail- and therefore they're likely to mark you better.
For the other constitution question (about restrictions on teh commonwealth) I included the section number, but for that question it's not nessicary.
The only ones you needed to know were S51, s128 and s109... and they didn't assess any of those specificly.
-
Ahh thanks I remember refering to Sections for Restrictions but did not know the actual sections instead i explained it