Well that's the Legal exam done! I'll be uploading our suggested answers periodically, but while we do let's hear your thoughts! How was that exam?
A Copy of the Exam is here if you need it!
PS - Young Offenders; totally called it 
keep scrolling for my commentary and suggested answers!Multiple Choice AnswersIf you are unsure why I've chosen something or think I've misinterpreted, please don't be shy, let me know by replying below!Q1: D - EU is an IGO
Q2: B - Committal hearings establish if there is enough evidence to proceed to a higher court
Q3: C - Remand is where the person is held in custody before Trial
Q4: B - Since the original decision was made in Local Court, an appeal would go to District Court
Q5: D - First tricky question,
the UDHR is not a treaty. Thus, the answer is D.
Q6: B - Diversionary programs are aimed at reducing recidivism
Q7: A - ICC handles cases of Crimes Against Humanity
Q8: C - The judge applied judicial discretion to not record the conviction
Q9: B - Self determination is such a popular question now...
Q10: C - This is an example of insider trading (economic offence)
Q11: B - The other options do not describe this scenario
Q12: B - It needs to be a Strict Liability Offence, and speeding is the only option that suits this
Q13: A - Governments are not obliged to abide by international standards, they can withdraw due to state sovereignty
Q14: A - Searches of property require a warrant (the crime does not qualify for a covert search, and the other answers do not make sense)
Q15: C - Provocation is the only partial defence listed
Q16: C - Separation of powers dictates that the judiciary be separate from the legislature
Q17: D - D is the most appropriate answer (see Dietrich v Queen (1992)). Best to apply process of elimination in this question.
Q18: A - This is a post sentencing consideration; non-Australian citizens can be deported in certain circumstances. This was a tricky one; very specific.
Q19: D - This is a very tough one. This refers to guideline judgements, which are actually handled by the NSW Sentencing Council (applied for by the Attorney General to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal) to add some structure to judicial discretion. They are NOT set by the DPP, and they are NOT set by the NSW LRC. The most appropriate answer here is D.
Q20: A - Another good one for process of elimination. The prosecution can always cross-examine, and the accused has every right to raise the evidence. The jury does not take a proactive role in the Adversarial System, so A is likely to be the correct answer.
Commentary from our Legal Lecturer (that's me!)This was, being honest, a very kind exam in many ways! Compared to some other humanities, we got pretty lucky!
The multiple choice had some doozies, but it always does. On the whole, not a super difficult section, though there were definitely a few that I view as very tricky (yay, I've got questions to add to my Kahoot's in next years lectures).
The short answer was nice in that it was very broad. You got your contemporary issue as your big question, but you could discuss it in a quite a broad sense, so it wasn't too bad! Hopefully you had plenty to discuss to get either 6 or 7. Those who attended my Legal lecture in early October had some practice for Question 22 on the Charter of Rights, which was a due question, so probably no huge surprise. A bit steep for 6 marks on a fairly small point! The first 2-marker on human rights in domestic legislation could have thrown a few people, but on the whole, the short answers were accessible.
The Crime essay should have been no surprise to anyone who has been on the forums, or who went to my lecture in early October. It was always the most likely option (next year now becomes much tougher to predict). I'd been encouraging to prepare for it, and it sounded like a lot of you had been from your posts, so hopefully that preparation helped you out!!
thankfully they didn't really blend a theme/challenge, because I think Young Offenders is restrictive enough as it is! (PS - I've predicted the Crime essay question two years in a row now, I'm pretty chuffed with myself, but I should probably quit while I'm ahead...
)
Click Here for Some Commentary on FAMILY and WORLD ORDER
On the Family Option, for those interested, the surrogacy question was another strong possibility that I was advising at the recent lectures. If they went specific, that is something they hadn't targeted yet, but to be honest I hated writing essays on it. I would definitely have picked the conflict question personally; it is broad enough to allow you to discuss divorce, domestic violence, and care and protection of children. They kept the usual pattern; one specific and one broad, so overall not too shabby!
On the World Order Option, for those interested, the questions were actually both quite specific! One was cooperation, one was R2P/State Sovereignty. The cooperation one could be approached broadly if you liked; talk about how the UN, ICJ, IGO's etc all encourage cooperation. It could easily be turned into an "evaluate responses" essay. The Sovereignty/R2P one would have been personally tougher for me, perhaps best approached with a series of case studies? Not sure, what did you guys do?
On the whole, this exam could have been a hell of a lot worse. That said, there were a number of areas that picked on relatively small parts of the syllabus (the crime essay included, even though it was a predictable question). For that reason, don't stress if you found one section particularly tough, because in an exam like that you are bound to have trouble at least somewhere!
Home
Help
Search
Login
Topic: HSC Legal Studies: Suggested Answers and Discussion (Read 24099 times)