LEGAL STUDIES EXAM THOUGHTS/DISCUSSION

[claire92]

Sorry, so why is fingerprinting wrong?

Because its a pre-arrest measure, however it can also be taken at arrest, during processing, so there is a bit of leave-way there.

[andy456]

Sorry, so why is fingerprinting wrong?

Because its a pre-arrest measure, however it can also be taken at arrest, during processing, so there is a bit of leave-way there.

In my textbook it has
-arrested and formally charged
-suspect questioned for reasonable time
-suspect fingerprinted; and DNA taken if required
-right to silence
then application for bail....

i think fingerprinting should be all good.

[babygurl]

Crap! so do I most likely lose 2 marks for it??? I think I'm gonna cry!

[babygurl]

I really hope andy456 is right.

[andy456]

I really hope andy456 is right.

]
I hope so to cause I did fingerprinting also

[lara2707]

I would have thought fingerprinting was fine :S

[chrisjb]

finger printing will be fine, they weren't trying to trip us up on that question I don't think.

Only thing is you might have needed to go into a little bit of detail with fingerprinting (like mention that there are age constraints) - unless the task word was 'list' or 'give' or something, but if it was 'explain' you probably shoul have mentioned the age barriers.

[Cianyx]

Fingerprinting is indeed correct. It was a simple mark and question, don't think they were trying to be pedantic there

[dse]

i got a response from a teacher i know marking exams and he said that the answer to the question was county or supreme court, however as the 150 hours led so many students to answer magistrates, it is also being accepted. therefore, of course, the answer to the following question could have been either judge or magistrate. the only area where students might lose marks now is 1b, as that the queens representative (governor) was required to attain 2/2.
fingerprinting is also correct.

[saaaaaam]

I didn't mention the Governor.

I explained that it was bicameral though. I was hoping that would be enough to get the marks.

[dse]

i threw governor in at the last second. i just don't know why they're marking the culpable driving question so easily, it was pretty much the only question with the ability to trip students up and they've taken that away. they should have stuck with county/supreme and judge, if you got it wrong you got it wrong and lost marks, same as any other question.

[ezst]

I find it stupid that we'll be marked wrong for not mentioning the governor. If i remember correctly the question stated "outlined" the "structure" of the Victorian Parliament. Not including the governor should't remove a mark because it's logical thinking that you'd get 1 mark for talking about VIC parliament being bicameral and stating the upper and lower house(There's your structure and 2 points summed up). Thus I didn't include him/her in my answer.

According to my text book the structure of Victorian Parliament is explained by, "It operates the same way as the commonwealth Parliament, with an upper and lower hourse. The upper house being the legislative council and the lower house being the legislative assembly".

[LFTM]

I find it stupid that we'll be marked wrong for not mentioning the governor. If i remember correctly the question stated "outlined" the "structure" of the Victorian Parliament. Not including the governor should't remove a mark because it's logical thinking that you'd get 1 mark for talking about VIC parliament being bicameral and stating the upper and lower house(There's your structure and 2 points summed up). Thus I didn't include him/her in my answer.

According to my text book the structure of Victorian Parliament is explained by, "It operates the same way as the commonwealth Parliament, with an upper and lower hourse. The upper house being the legislative council and the lower house being the legislative assembly".

Why is it stupid?
Isn't the structure of vic parliament:
Governor
legislative assembly(lower house)
legislative council(upper house)

It's probably fair that we should be expected to mention governor.
Anyways that's just my opinion.

[saaaaaam]

I find it stupid that we'll be marked wrong for not mentioning the governor. If i remember correctly the question stated "outlined" the "structure" of the Victorian Parliament. Not including the governor should't remove a mark because it's logical thinking that you'd get 1 mark for talking about VIC parliament being bicameral and stating the upper and lower house(There's your structure and 2 points summed up). Thus I didn't include him/her in my answer.

According to my text book the structure of Victorian Parliament is explained by, "It operates the same way as the commonwealth Parliament, with an upper and lower hourse. The upper house being the legislative council and the lower house being the legislative assembly".

Why is it stupid?
Isn't the structure of vic parliament:
Governor
legislative assembly(lower house)
legislative council(upper house)

It's probably fair that we should be expected to mention governor.
Anyways that's just my opinion.

To be honest, the fact that the governor was part of the structure of parliament was never discussed in my class. We only spoke about the bi-cameral nature of parliament.

I do agree that you shouldn't be penalised for not] mentioning something when you've provided sufficient information for two marks.

[Cianyx]

Fuck. Missed out on the governor part