HSC Stuff > HSC Legal Studies

HSC Legal Studies Question Thread

<< < (437/443) > >>

emilyyyyyyy:

--- Quote from: Thankunext on October 30, 2019, 12:28:18 pm ---Hello!

May I ask what the difference is between the 2 questions below? The answers are different for both.

1. The police hold Susan in custody because they believe she may commit a serious crime. What is this an example of?
A. Remand
B. Recidivism
C. Protective custody
D. Preventative detention

2. Joan is charged with a serious home invasion. She is kept in custody because of the fear She may reoffend. What is this an example of?
A. Protective custody
B. Preventative detention
C. Recidivism
D. Remand

Thank you!

--- End quote ---

I could be completely wrong but I think with the first question, bc she hasn't actually committed the crime yet, it'd be preventative detention?

And for the second, bc she has committed the crime and bc the police might think she will reoffend, she isn't offered bail, therefore she's in remand?

I hope that's right I'm sorry if it isn't :)

maddy.orchard:

--- Quote from: shanellegeorge123 on October 30, 2019, 01:40:47 pm ---Hi! Can anyone explain judicial guidelines to me? I know statutory guidelines are in legislation so judges have to follow it I.e. maximum sentences, but how would you describe judicial? And if you were to make a paragraph discussing judicial guidelines what would you talk about?

--- End quote ---

Basically, these are court decisions that give guidance to judges in relation to how they should sentence offenders. They help to remove inconsistencies in sentencing procedures by ensuring that similar cases are treated and punished in the same way (otherwise offenders who commit similar crimes would be punished differently - not all judges think the same way). Helps to uphold community expectations because society expects that certain offences will be punished in particular ways.

In terms of what you would talk about,
- mention the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) and its relation to the sentencing process
- discuss the impact in judicial discretion
- judicial guidelines do not apply for all crimes - some statute overrides this (for example, mandatory sentencing laws removes judicial discretion)
- NSW sentencing council looks at the different sentencing decisions made by judges and by focusing on their reasoning they determine one judgement to be the best way to punish a particular offence
- case example: R v Henry 1999 sets the precedent for armed robbery cases - every judge must follow this decision when deciding on armed robbery cases OR provide good reasons why they didn't

Hope this helps!

avocadinq:

--- Quote from: Carolineee on October 30, 2019, 08:27:07 pm ---Hey guys,
I've been doing practice essay plans and I am soo confused on issues of compliance and non-compliance involving crime? Like what could I write about it?

--- End quote ---

Remember that compliance is obeying the law whereas non-compliance is not obeying the law. For crime, it's about how successful your controlling idea is in establishing deterrence so that crimes will not be committed in the future. An example of this could be the Children's Court - while the Court itself creates a less intimidating procedure focused on rehabilitation, it is ineffective in addressing issues of compliance and non-compliance as it doesn't really reduce recidivism.

maddy.orchard:

--- Quote from: phungies on October 29, 2019, 10:22:38 am ---Thank you so much! On a side note, I was wondering if it was okay to intertwine some of the topics? For example, for the criminal investigation process, I am planning on doing a paragraph on the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2016 and talk about the powers of the police in regards to terrorism. However, if we were asked a question on young offenders, I would want to utilise the same act but twist the topic sentence around, perhaps say that terrorism is targeted towards younger people and thus they become young offenders... something like that?

--- End quote ---

The terrorism (police powers) act 2016 allows individuals as young as 14 to be detained without charge for 14 days which denies their civil rights. in terms of young offenders you could say that this goes against the right to protect young offenders in accordance to CROC.
This is a good article you could use to back up that point https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/suspected-teen-extremists-could-be-held-for-two-weeks-without-charge-20170612-gwpg4a.html

maddy.orchard:
Hey, would anyone doing consumer law happen to have any good cases they'd be willing to share? I literally have none and I'm freaking out a bit

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page