HSC Legal Studies Question Thread

[PulseDefect]

How could I incorporate law reform with the criminal trial process? These are the dot points under that heading:

• court jurisdiction
• the adversary system
• legal personnel: magistrate, judge, police
prosecutor, Director of Public Prosecution,
Public Defenders
• pleas, charge negotiation
• legal representation, including legal aid
• burden and standard of proof
• use of evidence, including witnesses
• defences to criminal charges:
– complete defences
– partial defences to murder
• the role of juries, including verdicts

Hi, an idea for law reform in the criminal trial process is the introduction of majority verdicts (which was some time ago though) and changes to evidence law which allowed negative inferences to be drawn from people using their right to silence. I am not sure what else you could go on, there hasn't been any major criminal law reform with regards to the actual trial process. If someone else could add a third idea? 

[isaacdelatorre]

How could I incorporate law reform with the criminal trial process? These are the dot points under that heading:

• court jurisdiction
• the adversary system
• legal personnel: magistrate, judge, police
prosecutor, Director of Public Prosecution,
Public Defenders
• pleas, charge negotiation
• legal representation, including legal aid
• burden and standard of proof
• use of evidence, including witnesses
• defences to criminal charges:
– complete defences
– partial defences to murder
• the role of juries, including verdicts

Hey there Paige,

Just a few things come to mind when looking at law reform in the Criminal Trial Process:

Firstly you could look at the reforms that came out of Skaf case in regards to the use of transcript evidence --> use of evidence, including witnesses.
You could also explore the reforms made to the partial defence of provocation which changed to become extreme provocation having a few different pre requisitions to be counted --> look at the R v Singh case.
Also there was reform to include majority judgements that is worth looking/writing about to hit the "role of juries, including verdicts"

Lemme know how those go

[katie,rinos]

How could I incorporate law reform with the criminal trial process? These are the dot points under that heading:

• court jurisdiction
• the adversary system
• legal personnel: magistrate, judge, police
prosecutor, Director of Public Prosecution,
Public Defenders
• pleas, charge negotiation
• legal representation, including legal aid
• burden and standard of proof
• use of evidence, including witnesses
• defences to criminal charges:
– complete defences
– partial defences to murder
• the role of juries, including verdicts

I don't know if it would entirely fit under these dot points but there is the amendments that were made to bail. I think its under the Bail Amendment Act 2014, but that included a risk assessment and the magistrates needed to look at the severity of the crime committed. There was a  presumption against bail which meant that the accused had to explain why they should receive bail.

[lucyjayne]

Just one more question... probably.

Would it be easier to argue that the law is effective or ineffective in defining an protecting varied family relationships?

[TheFreeMarketeer]

Just one more question... probably.

Would it be easier to argue that the law is effective or ineffective in defining an protecting varied family relationships?

I personally wouldn't stick to absolutes. Argue that it's both effective and ineffective to a degree.

[lucyjayne]

I personally wouldn't stick to absolutes. Argue that it's both effective and ineffective to a degree.

Gotta make that judgement tho

[TheFreeMarketeer]

Gotta make that judgement tho

So come to the conclusion that, overall, it's mildly effective.

[Neilab]

Hey Guys!

I've been given another In-class assessment and Media file for World Order! Our school has finished our trials (we finished them week 9 and 10 of term 2) and this is my last assessment for legal!

So I have a few questions in regards to World Order, as I find it a lot harder than Crime and Family Law;

1- How do you structure responses for World Order? I always found that with Family and Crime it was clearer and was usually more syllabus-orientated... but with World Order I find it difficult to approach questions!

2- What are some solid case studies you can use for a broad range of questions? I was thinking of studying South China Sea, Syria, Sudan, Afghanistan, and a few others in-depth

3 - Lastly I was wondering if you could help me with picking a question for the assessment! Should I pick....

(a) How effectively do legal responses address issues of compliance and non-compliance in the promotion of peace and the resolution of conflict?

OR

(b) Evaluate the extent to which issues associated with the rules regarding the conduct of hostilities reflect changing values and ethical standards on world order.

I was wondering if you could perhaps also give a run-down of what I'd include in either of these responses? Sadly my school has only JUST started section 2 of the syllabus (respones) and I am rather clueless!

THANK you so much in advance!! 

[Neilab]

My school had trials last term and following the legal studies exam I noticed that quite a few students had stated that they 'made up' quotes and articles for their crime and family law essays (e.g. pretending to quote Nick Cowdery or simply just saying
"in a 2014 SMH article")

Most of these girls also got 13-14-15/15 on their crime essay and quite a few got 23-24/25 on their family one!

 I was wondering what your thoughts were on this in regards to the HSC? Is it likely that markers will pull up on this and penalise marks?

[jamonwindeyer]

Gotta make that judgement tho

So come to the conclusion that, overall, it's mildly effective.

Massively agree with this - Absolutes can get a little dry to argue and take half of your potential evidence away. You can take a "middle of the road" stance and argue it effectively, arguing ineffectiveness in some areas and effectiveness in others

[jamonwindeyer]

1- How do you structure responses for World Order? I always found that with Family and Crime it was clearer and was usually more syllabus-orientated... but with World Order I find it difficult to approach questions!

World Order questions are all really similar, I normally approached them in one of two ways. You can go response by response, with a paragraph on the UNSC, a paragraph on the General Assembly, a paragraph on NATO, etc etc - Or you can go case by case, examining contemporary world scenarios and evaluating how all the responses respond to each of them in turn. Both work! I did response by response in my Trial, then case by case in my HSC - Very much your preference

2- What are some solid case studies you can use for a broad range of questions? I was thinking of studying South China Sea, Syria, Sudan, Afghanistan, and a few others in-depth

Those are excellent choices, I'd also throw North Korea in there as a super contemporary one - You could also discuss the issues going on with Russia (perhaps including the Ukrainian debacle that happened a few years back)

3 - Lastly I was wondering if you could help me with picking a question for the assessment! Should I pick....

(a) How effectively do legal responses address issues of compliance and non-compliance in the promotion of peace and the resolution of conflict?

OR

(b) Evaluate the extent to which issues associated with the rules regarding the conduct of hostilities reflect changing values and ethical standards on world order.

I was wondering if you could perhaps also give a run-down of what I'd include in either of these responses? Sadly my school has only JUST started section 2 of the syllabus (respones) and I am rather clueless!

THANK you so much in advance!! 

I personally hate both of those but I'd go with A myself! I'd be discussing how each response encourages compliance with international standards, peer pressure would be a big part of it, state sovereignty would be the barrier to it! This probably will make more sense as you discuss the responses, but you'd include the usuals - UNSC, General Assembly, IGO's etc

[jamonwindeyer]

My school had trials last term and following the legal studies exam I noticed that quite a few students had stated that they 'made up' quotes and articles for their crime and family law essays (e.g. pretending to quote Nick Cowdery or simply just saying
"in a 2014 SMH article")

Most of these girls also got 13-14-15/15 on their crime essay and quite a few got 23-24/25 on their family one!

 I was wondering what your thoughts were on this in regards to the HSC? Is it likely that markers will pull up on this and penalise marks?

I personally never made any of them up - The way I see it, very possible it gets overlooked in the rush of marking. However, if the marker notices you've fudged a case, you lose all credibility in that essay. It would really hurt how you are perceived. So I just don't think it is worth it

[chelseam]

I'd be discussing how each response encourages compliance with international standards, peer pressure would be a big part of it, state sovereignty would be the barrier to it!

Hey Jamon! What kind of things could you talk about for peer pressure?

[jamonwindeyer]

Hey Jamon! What kind of things could you talk about for peer pressure?

So take something like NATO - When everyone else in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation wants to do something, the countries you rely on for trade and security and intelligence - You will want to do it too. As soon as countries form alliances those alliances can be used to leverage that country into doing certain things.

Of course, this doesn't always work. North Korea is very happy to ignore NATO and the UN, for example! These are the sorts of things you discuss and analyse

[chelseam]

Of course, this doesn't always work. North Korea is very happy to ignore NATO and the UN, for example! These are the sorts of things you discuss and analyse

Thanks Jamon