VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[Lear]

I believe so but I am not too sure as I am still learning this stuff my self. I hope someone more knowledgeable can comment on this. I just don’t see how it it ethical for VLA to determine if a person should receive assistance depending on how the community views them.

[Poet]

Here's the question.
"Joffrey has been convicted and imprisoned for 3 murders. He must serve a minimum of 40 years in prison before he is eligible for parole. The nature of the offences were such that Joffrey is notoriously unpopular. However, Joffrey wants to appeal his sentence on the basis that it is 'manifestly excessive.' He has received free legal advice that he has good prospects that his sentence may be reduced. Given Joffrey has no assets and cannot afford a private lawyer, he wants to obtain free legal aid. In your opinion, will Joffrey be eligible for a legal assistance grant? Give reasons."

Thank you!

Hi MissSmiley!

I noticed your question and Lear's response, which is a very good one. However, when you say that the VLA "must give him legal rep if he meets the means test criteria", this isn't entirely true. He may be eligible for representation and assistance via VLA, however due to three convictions and a large sentence, VLA has the right to refuse his application. VLA is under no obligation to help one person over another, especially when that person has been convicted three times over, which is where VLA may decide to give their assistance to someone more likely to win the case/appeal. So because the question only asks if Joffrey will "be eligible for a legal assistance grant", don't mention obligations.
Hope this helps!

PS: You can read about VLA's criteria here:
https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/get-legal-services-and-advice/get-lawyer-to-run-your-case
This page probably answers your question perfectly!

[MissSmiley]

Hi MissSmiley!

I noticed your question and Lear's response, which is a very good one. However, when you say that the VLA "must give him legal rep if he meets the means test criteria", this isn't entirely true. He may be eligible for representation and assistance via VLA, however due to three convictions and a large sentence, VLA has the right to refuse his application. VLA is under no obligation to help one person over another, especially when that person has been convicted three times over, which is where VLA may decide to give their assistance to someone more likely to win the case/appeal. So because the question only asks if Joffrey will "be eligible for a legal assistance grant", don't mention obligations.
Hope this helps!

PS: You can read about VLA's criteria here:
https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/get-legal-services-and-advice/get-lawyer-to-run-your-case
This page probably answers your question perfectly!

Thanks so much, secretly_a_poet !!
Of course your response helps !
That link was exactly what I wanted! I'm gonna read it really carefully now, and I'll double check my answer with my teacher to see how she wants it to be written!
Right! So I won't mention obligations then
Thank you so much once again!!

[rei409]

Does appropriateness of sentence indicators mean a strength of sentence indicators or does it mean when should it be used?

[Poet]

Hey rei409, welcome to ATAR Notes!

Sentence indications are "statements made by a judge to an accused about the sentence they could face if they plead guilty to the offence". When the "appropriateness" of sentence indications is referred to, it probably means its use in accordance to the principles of justice; fairness, equality and access, as the word appropriateness means "the quality of being suitable or proper in the circumstances" and in Victorian criminal law, the appropriateness if committal proceedings are to uphold the principles of justice.
Good luck!
Poet. xx

[Glasses]

Does appropriateness of sentence indicators mean a strength of sentence indicators or does it mean when should it be used?

Hey there!
In addition to the above -
When discussing "appropriateness", you can draw on strengths and weaknesses as part of your discussion; however, don't simply say "a strength of sentence indicators is x." Instead, I'd be drawing on strengths and weaknesses to make an argument. E.g. "Given the fact that sentence indicators are x (strength), they are particularly useful in y (situation)."

[Ra Ra Rasputin]

I have a control freak as a teacher who nit picks everything. This is what her lessons look like; she gives us a booklet then shows us the powerpoint of the booklet to copy out the missing spaces. Then she makes us answer an exam question but first, she writes a 'plan' up, basically giving us the answer. We barely answer questions from the textbook and we barely do case studies. When she asks us a question she answers it herself 5 seconds later and when she gives us an activity she doesnt give us enough time to finish it because she interupts us by giving the answers. On the off chance that someone answers a question she just stares at you and then rephrases what you said but in her way. She expects us to do all of our homework (though she rarely gives us any because again, she gives us all the answers) through google docs and wants the document to be set up in her specific way, she literally told us that we dont need exercise books. How are we meant to learn? She spends more time colour coding then teaching. She's also extremely condescending. She'll read something out and then she'll ask us the most obvious questions like 'do you know what hispanic means?', 'Do you know what detrimental means?' She treates us like we're idiots like we're not in prep, we're in year 12! Ffs she gave us a task words booklet with steps on how to answer questions that begin with discuss, explain, identify, etc.. I'm not stupid! She expects everything to be done her way and wont get it through her thick skull that not everybody likes interactive learning or being fed answers. I feel as if she doesnt allow anyone in the class to think for themselves, everything has to be said and written the way she would do it. I'm also annoyed because i got 8 out of 20 (an E!) for part a of sac 1. I find this very insulting because A, i studied hard and B, subjects like law, politics, history and literature are my forte so how did i f*ck up? When she went through the answers all she did was rephrase what i wrote. One question was explain the right to trial by jury and it was 2 marks but i lost a mark because i didnt say that it only applied to indictable offences like omg she didnt even specify in the question plus why would i need to write that if any idiot knows that only indictable offences are heard by a judge and jury. Another question was explain the principle of fairness and how it is achieved. I explained it and that it is achieved through the hearing rule and the rule against bias, i explained them as well. I lost marks because I didnt spell out for her what bias is. Its not just me whos annoyed, the majority of my class got Es for the sac with some getting a UG. Im considering just reading the textbook and going on edrolo for notes because using her notes are a hopeless cause. My question is, will getting an E for this sac set me up for a bad study score and what will happen if for example, a cohort does better on the exam then expected but their sacs are low, will vcaa question the teachers marking? Thanks in advance. 

[Bell9565]

Its not just me whos annoyed, the majority of my class got Es for the sac with some getting a UG. Im considering just reading the textbook and going on edrolo for notes because using her notes are a hopeless cause. My question is, will getting an E for this sac set me up for a bad study score and what will happen if for example, a cohort does better on the exam then expected but their sacs are low, will vcaa question the teachers marking? Thanks in advance.

Hey, I don't do legal myself but I know based on my other subjects and friends who do that using edrolo and the textbook will improve you chances at doing well. Also utilise things like ATAR notes & their lectures (they helped my biol amazingly), cambridge checkpoints and any other resources you can find. Additionally VCAA don't care about your SAC mark, just your ranking so if everyone does crap then as long as you have a good rank you'll be fine. Your cohort's SAC's will scale to how your cohort does on the exam - so if I were you I would invest some time in some out of class 'classes' especially leading up to exams where your whole cohort may have a chance to improve which will pull up your SACs
I hope that helps!

[meganrobyn]

I have a control freak as a teacher who nit picks everything. <snipped content for brevity> Thanks in advance. 

I just want to start by saying that I do sympathise. But I want to give some advice - however, that doesn't mean I don't sympathise.

Okay, so, lots of teachers are highly prescriptive. So much so it can drive some students crazy. But that doesn't mean they're always wrong, and it can be easy to overlook or miss out on the things they offer if you're pissed off at the whole. For example, yeah, you do need to say that the right to trial by jury only exists for federal indictable offences; otherwise, in Victoria, it's only a statutory entitlement. And the question won't spell that out for you. Also, most decent students lose far more marks on the exam for not following the task word than they do for making errors in the content. So giving you task word definitions, instructions and structures is actually REALLY helpful (as long as they're correct). Highly prescriptive teachers can frustrate students who want to do more processing by themselves, but they can also get great exam results because a lot of students get overwhelmed by too much choice and thinking and genuinely do better if they're just told what answer to write - no approach is going to work for everyone. In Year 12 your primary learning environment should be at home - not at school. School is just ONE resource. You take what is of value, and then you go to other sources to fill in the gaps. This should be your approach for every student, even with teachers you adore.

So, what your teacher is giving you is clear, unambiguous instructions on what she thinks will get 100% for each question. This is more than a lot of teachers give. And if she thinks they're 100% answers, a bunch of other teachers will, too, most likely. For SACs, you memorise and repeat. For the exam, you then use your judgment and decide whether to alter those answers at all, along with how they can apply in principle to other questions. It might not be your preferred way, but as long as she understands the SD and is fair and equal in the way she applies the rules, she's offering something of value.

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone!

I just needed help with this scenario question:

Denis was charged with the murder of his brother in a reserve in Ivanhoe. He pleaded guilty upon arrest at the reserve and told police that he is willing to do community work. He has significant mental health issues after being abused as a child.

There are two questions:
1. What factors may be taken into consideration before sentencing?
I find mostly mitigating factors, so like how he pleaded guilty upon arrest, told police that he is willing to do community work, and also how he is mentally ill and suffered abuse as a child.

2. What sanction could be imposed? Which sanction will not be appropriate?
I'm a bit confused, so I think imprisonment wouldn't work here because he has mental issues and because he had been abused as a child, a straight stict jail sanction would be too harsh, and anyway the purpose in this case would be to rehabilitate him, wouldn't it?
So can the court sanction a CCO for murder? Is rehabilitation included in a CCO?
If not, does that mean Denise will just follow a rehabilitation program?
At the same time, I think CCO and rehab would be lenient sanctions for murder.

I would really appreciate some help with the second question and just general thoughts if you have any about how you approach 'whether a sanction will be effective' question !

Thanks so much guys!

[TheAspiringDoc]

Hi I was watching this movie and it got me thinking:

If someone stole money and gave it to their kids and was found guilty
- after one day
- just before they died (many years later)
- the day after they died
- five generations on

What is the legal take on each case? Obviously for the first one they'd be fully penalised and have the money taken back, but after 5 generations I'd guess not? Where is the line drawn 

[meganrobyn]

Legally, no line in terms of statute of limitations. There is no limitation period for indictable offences, even if heard summarily. And, as far as I know, inheriting stolen property is no different from receiving it any other way: it's not yours.

There is a law called adverse possession that applies to *land* property, though - 15 years and it's yours if the owner makes no movements asserting ownership.

[TheAspiringDoc]

Legally, no line in terms of statute of limitations. There is no limitation period for indictable offences, even if heard summarily. And, as far as I know, inheriting stolen property is no different from receiving it any other way: it's not yours.

There is a law called adverse possession that applies to *land* property, though - 15 years and it's yours if the owner makes no movements asserting ownership.

Huh, so if we looked 300 years back on ancestry.com and found out our great great ... grandparents were thieves and their victims sued us for their stolen property that could actually work out?

I know I'm being very specific, but this is only hypothetical - I'm just quite interested in how such a hazy issue is resolved 😲

Thanks for your answer!

[Jigsaw]

I think this has been posted elsewhere but does anyone know when VCAA will upload the sample legal studies examination?

[Poet]

Huh, so if we looked 300 years back on ancestry.com and found out our great great ... grandparents were thieves and their victims sued us for their stolen property that could actually work out?

I know I'm being very specific, but this is only hypothetical - I'm just quite interested in how such a hazy issue is resolved 😲

Thanks for your answer!

Hmm... It's a fascinating concept you bring forth, I've never really thought of it. Thanks for getting me to think!
I doubt that persons could be sued for their ancestor's wrongs, especially when you look back three hundred years. I think a case like that is likely to be dismissed because no-one can make a valid claim of proof that the people still have the wealth, or had knowledge of their ancestor's wrongs. It would also be rare if the families were easily traceable and/or if the two families even had any form of contact, let alone knowledge of each other.
This could apply to a case such as Ned Kelly's relatives. Ned Kelly had no descendants of his own (or we think he didn't - let's not get caught up in that debate); however, a lot of what he stole went to his family members, who would have used that as a resource. No-one is suing Ned Kelly's great-great-great-great-nephew for starting their bakery up on money given to them in a will from their grandfather's grandfather. What would be the logic in that? I think something like this would rely a lot more on people's common sense than on the law - because no matter what the law states, "the law doesn't expire" and all that, people should know when to let it go.

Huh, this would be a good topic to bump to philosophy thread on...

And to Jigsaw:

I think this has been posted elsewhere but does anyone know when VCAA will upload the sample legal studies examination?

Sorry VCAA is being slow, but it should be out any day now.
However, a lot of the past examination reports should help you. Here are the ones from 2002 onwards:
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Pages/vce/studies/legalstudies/exams.aspx#H2N1002D
You probably already know about these, but I find them useful to read through.