VCE Stuff > VCE Legal Studies
VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
Poet:
--- Quote from: Ken0015 on November 03, 2019, 04:31:03 pm ---Hi there, I have a couple of questions for anyone who could help. How beneficial Is it to know case examples and/or specific sections where its not explicitly written in the study design? Also, should we know the 5 specific kinds of damages e.g compensatory, punitive, nominal etc?
Thanks heaps!
--- End quote ---
Hey!
Case examples are very useful when it comes to the extended response questions, and using ones outside of the study design (eg. Not Mabo or R v Brislan or any examples relevant to cases in the U3&4 study designs) can definitely display an advanced understanding of the concepts in the exam. However, be aware that these are not at all necessary, so if you're stressed about covering all the content, scratch the idea of non-compulsory study altogether.
You should be able to list the basic definitions of each of the damages; and if you feel like you can't do that, I would recommend remembering at least three you believe would be most likely to come up.
Mackenzie Aps:
Hi I am just doing an introduction research project for VCE 3/4 as I am in Year 10 and commencing VCE 3/4 legal in Year 11. My first project I have this task to complete and would appreciate some feedback and advice.
TASK 2
Australia’s legal system is based on many important principles.
The most important of these is that the legal system demonstrates JUSTICE.
In the study of the Criminal and Civil Justice systems in the Legal Studies Unit 3/4 Course, the principle of Justice is studied in detail. In particular, students will be required to EXAMINE what is meant by the principle of JUSTICE in practice and EVALUATE the degree to which Australia’s Criminal and Civil systems effectively delivers Justice.
For centuries, the symbol of Justice within English legal systems has been the one above: a blindfolded lady holding a set of scales in one hand and a sword in the other.
Research the following questions:
What do each of the following elements of the symbol of justice represent: the blindfold, the scales and the sword?
What are three synonyms for Justice?
Answer the following questions:
Why is it important for individuals to believe that a legal system provides justice?
In the criminal law system of Australia, all people charged with an offence are entitled to the “presumption of innocence”. What does this mean and how does the operation of this principle reflect and demonstrate the ideals of justice?
Why may each of the following factors affect the ability of an individual to receive justice within the legal system: wealth, racial background, cultural background, geographical location, level of education?
J_Rho:
"A person charged with a Commonwealth indictable offence should be able to decide to have their trial heard by a judge alone in the absence of a jury" Discuss the extent to which you agree with this statement? (6 marks)
I disagree with this statement. The absence of a jury will not allow fairness as a jury's key role in upholding the principles of justice is to be an independent, decision-making body, whose decision - made unanimously - is based on the evidence presented in court, rather than prejudice or external information. The absence of a jury allows room for a potentially biased judge to make a decision that is not in the best interest of the victims and society. As such, this could foster a system where injustice and bias are common.
On the other hand, if someone wishes to be tried without a jury, a quick trial where the outcome is swift could benefit the victim and their family by not prolonging, and allying the stresses of the trial. Whether or not it is seen as beneficial to the victim, the accused or society, having an indictable offence heard in the absence of a jury will not uphold the principles of justice.
How is my response? What am I missing and how many marks do you reckon this response would get?
Balfe:
--- Quote from: J_Rho on February 01, 2020, 06:35:38 pm ---"A person charged with a Commonwealth indictable offence should be able to decide to have their trial heard by a judge alone in the absence of a jury" Discuss the extent to which you agree with this statement? (6 marks)
I disagree with this statement. The absence of a jury will not allow fairness as a jury's key role in upholding the principles of justice is to be an independent, decision-making body, whose decision - made unanimously - is based on the evidence presented in court, rather than prejudice or external information. The absence of a jury allows room for a potentially biased judge to make a decision that is not in the best interest of the victims and society. As such, this could foster a system where injustice and bias are common.
On the other hand, if someone wishes to be tried without a jury, a quick trial where the outcome is swift could benefit the victim and their family by not prolonging, and allying the stresses of the trial. Whether or not it is seen as beneficial to the victim, the accused or society, having an indictable offence heard in the absence of a jury will not uphold the principles of justice.
How is my response? What am I missing and how many marks do you reckon this response would get?
--- End quote ---
I think the key points to note for this question are;
Jury Better:
* Jury spreads the burden of decision making across 12 people
* Jury is important due to their cross-sectional nature (representatives of the community)
Judge Better:
* Jury takes time to reach a decision as it must be unanimous
* Judge may be better placed to decide the case in accordance with the law (cause they're trained/experienced)
* Jury may not fully comprehend evidence due to its technical nature
* Jury don't provide reasons for their decision
As such, I'd give your answer a 3/6 in its current state. The first point to correct is the very first sentence. The question asks 'to what extent' - so, you need to say an extent. E.g. 'I disagree to a large extent'. From there you've gone on to make two very reasonable points, which I mostly agree with, but for 6 marks, the assessor will be expecting around 3-4 points. The wording could also be adjusted to not ramble on as much:
"The absence of a jury will inhibit fairness as a key role of the jury is to be independent. The absence of a jury allows room for a potentially biased judge to make a decision (as opposed to spreading the burden across 12 individuals). This may lead to unfair outcomes."
Mackenzie Aps:
Hi I just got my first Legal SAC back and I am a little disappointed, I got a B. I felt I had answered everything - I haven't received any feedback or comments however on the SAC. I will probably take it in to Tutesmart with me for feedback or email someone for some time to go over. I attended tutesmart sessions for tutoring and thought I was doing well, so this was a big shock for me as I was hoping for at least an A. Can anyone give me some feedback on how this would impact on my SS, I know I have a long way to go but I was aiming A/A+ average and 40+ ATAR, VCE.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version