VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[meganrobyn]

"Describe the protections afforded to vulnerable witnesses in criminal cases involving sexual offences and family violence offences. In your answer, explain how this right upholds one or more of the principles of justice. (5 marks)"

The 'protections' are a victim's rights, aren't they, when is person is a victim of a sexual/family violence offence? So do I just describe some of the rights given to vulnerable witnesses and show how that relates to the principles of justice, or have I got it all wrong?

Yeah, that's basically it I can't think off the top of my head of any vulnerable witness provisions that *don't* apply to victims of sexual assault and family violence, but maybe just double-check that for the protections you choose to discuss.

[The Special One]

Yeah, that's basically it I can't think off the top of my head of any vulnerable witness provisions that *don't* apply to victims of sexual assault and family violence, but maybe just double-check that for the protections you choose to discuss.

Where would one double check that beyond having to look at the actual legislation? I don't think most legal 3/4 textbooks would have that information.

[meganrobyn]

Where would one double check that beyond having to look at the actual legislation? I don't think most legal 3/4 textbooks would have that information.

Have you looked at your textbook? My textbook (CPAP) labels pretty clearly the protections that are specific to victims of sexual offences and family violence, and the other protections that can be given to other vulnerable witnesses. Have you looked in yours? Otherwise, the legislation is pretty easy to check. It's Div 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

[Lear]

Odd question - is the kidnapping of a dog a summary offence or an indictable offence?

[MissSmiley]

Hi guys!

Just had a question about Adrian Bayley's case:

So firstly he was sentenced to life in prison with a non-parole period of 35 years for the rape and murder of Jill Meagher. (this was in Supreme Court 2013). While serving that prison sentence, on 28 May 2015 he was sentenced for several new offences, including rape, in the County Court after 3 separate trials were held. A new non-parole period of 43 years was imposed.

And one of the questions asks: Do you agree with the decision of the County Court in the 2015 case?

So if I had to say I agree, would my reasoning be something about concurrent and cumulative sentences? In that because the Prosecution has found new evidence for offences including rape, Bayley should have a consecutive sentence (years would be added on) to make sure it's fair for the victims and to severely punish him.
Concurrent would not be fair as he might not get the necessary and just punishment for one or more of his offences, as he's spending time in prison all at once for numerous offences.
(Sorry, this might not be the clearest explanation )

But is there any other way you could approach this, if you were to agree yes to the County Court's decision?

Or how would you explain your answer if you disagreed with the new sentence from the County Court?

Thank you so much!

[MissSmiley]

Odd question - is the kidnapping of a dog a summary offence or an indictable offence?

Kidnapping a person according to this website:
https://melbourne.armstronglegal.com.au/criminal-law/offences/extortion/kidnapping
is an indictable offence (as we would hope!!)

But not sure about kidnapping an animal! This sort of reminds me of the fact that you can't be charged with murder of an animal !

So I guess it's summary offence?? 

But please don't go by what I said!! I may be wrong.

[Poet]

Odd question - is the kidnapping of a dog a summary offence or an indictable offence?

That is an odd question. Weird no-one's asking about "cat burglars".. ha.

Anyway, the "kidnapping" of a dog would count as taking another person's property, thereby making the most likely answer to your question a summary offence because honestly that's just straight-up theft. I like that question.

Must have been a cute dog.

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone!

I'd really appreciate it if anyone helps me out with this question:

'Pablo has been charged with serious fraud charges involving artwork. The trial is expected to last 5 months, and significant amount of time and resources is about to be spent by the DPP on the case. Pablo maintains his innocence, but his defence is weak. Witnesses are ready and willing to give evidence.'
Do you think a plea negotiation is appropriate for this case? Justify your response.

Now I looked at the DPP's policy on resolution by plea negotiations, and it said:
"In relation to plea negotiations, there is a Director’s Policy on Resolution, which clearly sets the considerations OPP solicitors must take into account when considering resolution by a plea of guilty. These include the strength of evidence including any admissions; any probable defences; the views of the victims and the informant; the accused’s criminal history; and the likely length of a trial. "

But I'm still unsure. At the same time I don't think a plea negotiation would work here, because it's gonna be such a lengthy trial and Pablo's defence isn't strong.
but then witnesses are willing to give evidence. So this confuses me.

I would really love to hear everyone's thoughts about this!

Thanks so much guys !!

[Lear]

Hi everyone!

I'd really appreciate it if anyone helps me out with this question:

'Pablo has been charged with serious fraud charges involving artwork. The trial is expected to last 5 months, and significant amount of time and resources is about to be spent by the DPP on the case. Pablo maintains his innocence, but his defence is weak. Witnesses are ready and willing to give evidence.'
Do you think a plea negotiation is appropriate for this case? Justify your response.

Now I looked at the DPP's policy on resolution by plea negotiations, and it said:
"In relation to plea negotiations, there is a Director’s Policy on Resolution, which clearly sets the considerations OPP solicitors must take into account when considering resolution by a plea of guilty. These include the strength of evidence including any admissions; any probable defences; the views of the victims and the informant; the accused’s criminal history; and the likely length of a trial. "

But I'm still unsure. At the same time I don't think a plea negotiation would work here, because it's gonna be such a lengthy trial and Pablo's defence isn't strong.
but then witnesses are willing to give evidence. So this confuses me.

I would really love to hear everyone's thoughts about this!

Thanks so much guys !!

Hey Smiley,
A purpose of plea negotiations is 'To achieve a prompt resolution to a criminal case without the cost, time, stress, trauma and inconvenience of a criminal.'
As you mentioned, the trial is going to be a lengthy one and therefore may incur high costs for Pablo which may not be worth if his defence is weak. Furthermore with a weak defence it is risky to go trial especially with witnesses ready and willing to give evidence. As Pablo, I would definitely consider a plea negotiation as often the prosecution may offer to allow the accused to plead guilty to a lesser charge.
Therefore, in my opinion, a plea negotiation would be very appropriate in this case due to likely length of trial, the strength of his defence and the willingness of witnesses.

[MissSmiley]

Hey Smiley,
A purpose of plea negotiations is 'To achieve a prompt resolution to a criminal case without the cost, time, stress, trauma and inconvenience of a criminal.'
As you mentioned, the trial is going to be a lengthy one and therefore may incur high costs for Pablo which may not be worth if his defence is weak. Furthermore with a weak defence it is risky to go trial especially with witnesses ready and willing to give evidence. As Pablo, I would definitely consider a plea negotiation as often the prosecution may offer to allow the accused to plead guilty to a lesser charge.
Therefore, in my opinion, a plea negotiation would be very appropriate in this case due to likely length of trial, the strength of his defence and the willingness of witnesses.

Aww!!!
Now I get it!
Great! So yup, it'll be easier for Pablo's defence to support him for a lesser charge, maybe, and then everything else is achieved!
Thanks so much, Lear !!
You're amazing!!

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone!

Another question, what does it mean when a case study says the criminal  is "notoriously unpopular" ?
Does VLA offer legal representation to these sorts of criminals?
(I've kinda got the answer to this question because another question asks "in your view, should VLA and community legal centres be able to refuse legal aid to a person who is considered notorious and unpopular because of their crimes?" Give reasons
So this suggests that at the moment, VLA does provide legal rep for these people.

But I don't get "notoriously unpopular."
Would you be able to explain it to me?

Thanks so much guys!!

[Lear]

I think it may refer to the view that certain criminals may not be appreciated by general society and thus people may feel these people do not deserve free legal assistance from tax payers. Criminals such as rapists and pedophiles may be considered ‘notoriously unpopular’

I may be wrong, however. Can you give some more information on the specific case study?

[MissSmiley]

I think it may refer to the view that certain criminals may not be appreciated by general society and thus people may feel these people do not deserve free legal assistance from tax payers. Criminals such as rapists and pedophiles may be considered ‘notoriously unpopular’

I may be wrong, however. Can you give some more information on the specific case study?

What you've said definitely makes sense, Lear! Thanks for replying back so promptly!

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!

[Lear]

Going off the fact that he has no assets and can’t afford a lawyer, he will likely pass the relevant tests required to determine if he is eligible for representation. The fact that he unpopular is irrelevant in my opinion as this is a subjective view and the law should always apply objectively. If the question was say, in the community’s eyes, should Joffrey be given free legal aid? It would be more relevant.

[MissSmiley]

Going off the fact that he has no assets and can’t afford a lawyer, he will likely pass the relevant tests required to determine if he is eligible for representation. The fact that he unpopular is irrelevant in my opinion as this is a subjective view and the law should always apply objectively. If the question was say, in the community’s eyes, should Joffrey be given free legal aid? It would be more relevant.

Right! Thanks so much, Lear!
So I could say regardless of whether he's notoriously unpopular or not, VLA must give him legal rep if he meets the means test criteria, can't I ?