Аракин. Учебник английского языка для студентов языковых специальностей. Аракин. Учебник английского языка для студентов языковых специал. Практический курс английского языка 4 курс Под редакцией В. Д. Аракина
 Скачать 2.25 Mb.
|
|
Participants of the legal procedure: 1) parties to a lawsuit: claimant/plaintiff(in a civil case); defendant, offender (first/repeat); attorney for the plaintiff (in a civil case); prosecutor (criminal); attorney for defence; 2) jury, Grand jury, to serve on a jury, to swear the jury, to convene; 3) witness — a credible witness; 4) a probation officer; 5) bailiff. 5. Legal procedure: to file a complaint/a countercomplaint, to answer/challenge the complaint; to notify the defendant of the lawsuit; to issue smb a summons; to issue a warrant of arrest (a search warrant); to indict smb for felony; to bring lawsuit; to take legal actions; to bring the case to court; to bring criminal prosecution; to make an opening statement; the prosecution; the defence; to examine a witness — direct examination, cross-examination; to present evidence – (direct, circumstantial, relevant, material, incompetent, irrelevant, admissible, inadmissib, corroborative, irrefutable, presumptive, documentary); to register (to rule out, to sustain) an objection; circumstances (aggravating, circumstantial, extenuating); to detain a person, detention; to go before the court.
7. A court room: the judge's bench, the jury box; the dock, the witness’ stand/box; the public gallery. The US Court System1 The courts are the overseers of the law. They administer it, they resolve disputes under it, and they ensure that it is and remains equal to and impartial for everyone. In the United States each state is served by the separate court systems, state and federal. Both systems are organized into three basic levels of courts — trial courts, intermediate ____________ 1 For the US Court structure see Appendix (p. 271). courts of appeal and a high court, or Supreme Court. The state courts are concerned essentially with cases arising under state law, and the federal courts with cases arising under federal law. Trial courts bear the main burden in the administration of justice. Cases begin there and in most instances are finally resolved there. The trial courts in each state include: common pleas courts, which have general civil and criminal jurisdiction and smaller in importance municipal courts, county courts and mayors' courts. The common pleas court is the most important of the trial courts. It is the court of general jurisdiction — almost any civil or criminal case, serious or minor, may first be brought there. In criminal matters, the common pleas courts have exclusive jurisdiction over felonies (a felony is a serious crime for which the penalty is a penitentiary term or death). In civil matters it has exclusive jurisdiction in probate, domestic relations and juvenile matters. The probate division deals with wills and the administration of estates, adoptions, guardianships. It grants marriage licenses to perform marriages. The domestic division deals with divorce, alimony, child custody. The juvenile division has jurisdiction over delinquent, unruly or neglected children and over adults, who neglect, abuse or contribute to the delinquency of children. When a juvenile (any person under 18) is accused of an offence, whether serious, or minor, the juvenile division has exclusive jurisdiction over the case. The main job of courts of appeal is to review cases appealled from trial courts to determine if the law was correctly interpreted and applied. The supreme court of each state is primarily a court of appeal and the court of last resort. The federal court structure is similar to the structure of the state court system. The trial courts in the federal system are the United States district courts. The United States courts of appeal are intermediate courts of appeal between the district courts and the United States Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court is the highest court in the nation and the court of last resort. It consists of a chief justice and eight associate justices, all of whom are appointed for life by the President with the Advice and Consent of the Senate. The duty of the Supreme Court is to decide whether laws passed by Congress agree with the Constitution. The great legal issues facing the Supreme Court at present are Government involvement with religion, abortion and privacy rights, race and sex discrimination. 1. As you read the text a) look for the answers to these questions: 1. What is the dual court system existing in the USA? What three levels of courts does it consist of? 2. What is the jurisdiction of the trial court? Define the jurisdiction of the common pleas court. 3. What kind of civil matters are brought to common pleas courts? Elaborate on probate, domestic relation and juvenile matters. 4. Speak about the jurisdiction of state and federal courts of appeals and state supreme courts. 5. What is the duty of the US Supreme Court? b) Summarize the text in 3 paragraphs, specifying the following: 1) the dual system of the US courts; 2) trial courts — courts of general Jurisdiction; 3) the US Supreme Court — the court judging the most explosive issues in American life. 2. Study the following text, a) Extract the necessary information about law enforcement in the USA: A criminal case begins when a person goes to court and files a complaint that another person has committed an offence. This is followed by issuing either an arrest wanmt or a summons. A criminal case is started when an indictment is returned by a grand jury before anything else happens in the case. Indictments most often are felony accusations against persons, who have been arrested and referred to the rand jury. After an accused is indicted, he is brought into court and is told the nature of the charge against him find gjfcrtl tft can plead guilty, which is the admission that he committed crime and can be sentenced without a trial. He can plead guilty and be tried. As a general rule the parties to civil suits and defendant criminal cases are entitled to "trial by jury of 12 jurors. But a jury is not provided unless it is demanded in writing in advance of the trial; in this case a civil or a criminal case is judge alone, greater criminal cases are tried to a three-judge panel. In trial by the jury the attorneys for each party make their opening statements. The prosecution presents its evidence based on the criminal investigation of the case. The attorney for the defence pleads the case of the accused, examines his witnesses and cross-examines the witnesses for the prosecution. Both, the prosecution and the defence, try to convince the jury. When all the evidence is in, the attorneys make their closing arguments to the jury with the prosecutor going first. Both attorneys try to show the evidence in the most favourable light for their sides. But if one of them uses improper materiaHn his final argument the opponent may object, the objection may be ruled out by the judge who will instruct the jury to disregard what was said or may be sustained. After this the judge proceeds to instruct the jury on its duty and the jury retires to the jury room to consider the verdict. In civil cases at least three-fourths of the jurors must agree on the verdict. In a criminal case there must not be any reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused, the verdict must be unanimous. The next stage is for the judge to decide, in case of a verdict of guilty, what sentence to impose on the convict. b) Use the material of the text and the topical vocabulary in answering the following questions: 1. Who are the participants in the legal procedure? 2. In what way does a legal procedure start a) in civil cases, b) in criminal cases? 3. Describe the procedure of the trial in the American court of common pleas. 4. What kind of offences are known to you? Specify the felony and misdemeanor. 5. What penalties arid sentences are imposed in the US courts? 3. Do library research and a) speak about the structure of the Russian courts. The following terms might be useful: the electivity of the people's court; social lawfulness; city courts; regional courts; supreme courts; people's courts; hearing of cases in courts of law; people's judge; people's assessor; courts of first instance; legal assistance; presumption of innocence. b) Give brief information on Russian law enforcement. Consider the following: 1. the jurisdiction of the Russian court; 2. the legal procedure of the trial; 3. the joint trial by a judge and two people's assessors; 4. the basic principle of the legal procedure — "presumption of innocence". 4. Juvenile delinquency is an issue about which people all over the world are concerned. a) Read the extracts given below which present information on the gravity of the problem: a) Youth gangs have been a part of Los Angeles since the fifties. Back then their activities were largely confined to petty crimes and small-scale marijuana dealing. But lately the numbers of gangs have become staggering totalling from about 5,000 members lo 10,000. Almpst all the gangs are involved in the cocaine trade. "A typical gang might have 200 kids from 13 to 26 years of age," says Steven Strong, the L.A. Police department's detective. "Two weeks ago 30-year-old David Thompson and his wife were stopped by three armed teenagers, who rushed the couple, robbed them and then casually shot Thompson in the head. The gang members pushed the dying man's wife out of the car, got in and drove away." b) Every night — and in many areas day and night, thousands of police cars patrol the streets of American towns. The list of crimes starts with petty crimes, goes through house-breaking, shoplifting, mug0ng to be topped by homicide. Entire neighbourhoods are terrorized by mobsters and thugs, many of them are quite young. c) Just think about how teenagers run away from homes, their own, from caring as it seems mothers, fathers, grandmothers. Why do they choose to look and act aggressive and tough? Take rockers who startle passers-by by the flashing lights of their roaring night motorbikes. Why do they, with their high-school background, have such a lack of thoughtful-ness? Self-assertion? Then why at other people's expense? b) Pair work. Team up with another student, work out the reasons for Juvenile delinquency as they are presented to the extract and discuss the extracts in pairs. c) Speak about the social background of juvenile delinquency and its role in contributing to the crime rate. Consider the following: 1. Are juvenile offenders usually found among children from broken homes or large unhappy poor families? 2. Is being unemployed anlmportant enough reason to push somebody onto the path of crime? 3. What would you say about disillusionment, loss of faith in the surrounding grown-up world as a possible reason for juvenile delinquency? 4. Speak on the vital role of drug addiction and alcohol consumption in the growing crime rate in general and in juvenile delinquency in particular. 5. Below is an interview with a judge on crime and punishment. The judge says why he gives help in some cases and punishment in others. a) Work in groups of 3 or 4 and assign different opinions on the problem of the punishment to each member of the group: Interviewer. Are there ever times when you just feel desperate, you know, you realize there's absolutely nothing that can be done for this person? Judge: Oh, yes, very often. Interviewer. And what do you do in such cases? Judge: Well, it depends how anti-social their action has been. If a person needs help one wants to give it to him or her, but on the other hand you always have to consider at the same time: the effect on society in general of too much kindness to too many people. Interviewer. You mean if such a person were let free he might cause far more trouble to other people than he could cause to himself while he's inside prison. Judge: Yes, indeed. And also if people were never punished I think undoubtedly crime would increase. b) Spend a few minutes individually thinking of further arguments you will use to back up your own opinion on the usefulness and types of punishment. c) Now discuss the issue with other members of the small group using the arguments you have prepared. Do your best to support those who share a similar point of view and try to dissuade those who don't agree with you. (Use cliches of persuasion, agreement/disagreement). 6. In arguments involving suggestions, partial agreement and disagreement certain functional phrases of attack and response1 are used. The tactics of attack may be tentative or direct. a) As yoy read the extracts below pay attention to the difference between the two: — Isn't it just possible that new evidence will throw quite a different light on the case? - — Might it not be true that the boy didn’t mean any harm. (tentative)
(direct) — All of these things are racial slurs, aren't they? (direct) b) Complete each of the following conversations below by supplementing the appropriate tactics of attack of the first speaker: 1. … Possibly (may be so) I'd agree with you to a certain extent. 2. … I see your point. 3. ... That may well be. 4. … I see what you mean, but... c) As you read the text below note down the functional phrases of attack and response: Juror 1: It's a tough decision to make, isn't it? Don't you think that it's an awful responsibility to have the future of that lad in our hands? I feel so sorry for him, he's not yet 21. Juror 2: Come off it! You can't be serious! He didn't just take the money, he also beat up the old lady. He's guilty, it's written all over his face. It's our social duty to keep our streets safe at night. Juror 3: I agree with your last statement, but surely you admit the evidence for convicting this young man is rather flimsy? Wouldn't you say that we need something more definite? __________ 1 See Appendix (p. 289). Juror 2: Ideally that's quite true, but there weren't any other witnesses. As I see it he had the motive, he has no alibi and the old lady recognized him... Juror 1: Hang on a minute. I'd like to point out that she only thought she recognized him. Isn't it just possible that a scared old lady of 76 could have been mistaken ? Juror 2: Fair enough, but it's all we have to go on. All the fingers seem to point at him. Juror 3: That may well be, but strong suspicion isn't enough to put someone away in prison. If you ask me, even if he is guilty, the shock of arrest and coming to trial will be enough to stop him making the same mistake again. Juror 4: I see what you mean, but the punishment's not our problem. We're here only to decide whether he's guilty or not. And the point is he was carrying a knife when the police picked him up, wasn't he? d) Act out the situation similar to the one given above. Use various tactics of attack and response. 7. In a students' debating club the motion is"punks, heavy metal fans, rockers, nostalglsts, green hippies and others should be prosecuted by law." a) Make a list of arguments for and against any legal sanctions against such groups of young people. b) Define your own attitudes to these groups. Do you think they pose a threat to public order? c) Participate in the discussion. Use the technique of defending your views by being forceful in presenting your arguments. Use the functional phrases of attack and response. 8. The success of a lawyer, especially a prosecutor, among other things depends on a skill in making a capital speech, based in some cases on the ability to attack, to force bis opinion on the Jury. Act as an attorney for the state in an imaginary case and prove at least one piece of evidence against the accused. Exercise your ability to ask the right kind of question, to be forceful in proving your point in attacking the counterarguments. 9. Panel discussion: Suppose the fundamentals of a new criminal code of Russia are being worked out. Six experts are invited to a panel discussion to your University. They are Dr. Kelina (LL.D.), a leading researcher with the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Dr. Orlov (LL.D.), the same Institute, Dr. Stem (LLJD.), professor of the Cincinnati University, Mr D. Fokin, a people's assessor, Mr S. Panin, a people's judge and a criminal reporter for the national newspaper. a) Open group discussion. Describe the members of the panel and elect the chairperson. b) Split into groups of 5-6 students and assign the roles of the panel. c) Before the beginning of the panel read the following selections carefully and extract the necessary information: — It's a time-honoured misconception that the stricter the punishment, the lesser the crime rate. This misconception has long been debated by history and science. Law cannot, and must not take revenge: punishment is not an end in itself, but a means of restoring social justice. It's a tool for re-education. This concept should form the guidelines of the new legislation. — Law is developing: it has no impunity in the court of time. A number of offences should be altogether excluded from the criminal law since administrative measures are quite sufficient against them. Say a driver violates some traffic regulations, and in the accident no one is hurt... — Unjust law warps and handicaps a nation's morale. Remember when in the not-so-distant past families of the "enemies of the people" hurriedly renounced their relations fully aware that the charges were false. — We used to say that we had neither drug addiction nor prostitution. As long as there were no such problems any legal responsibility was out of the question. Now it is widely claimed that we need criminal laws against both drug addiction and prostitution. — Could we make, say, prostitution a criminal offence? What could the evidence be? Who could bear witness? — The violation of law would be extremely difficult to prove and the punishment would necessarily be selective. — Some would be charged, others would be spared, and a selective application of law is arbitrary rule. — But the real problem is elsewhere. Is immorality a breach of law? Don't we have to distinguish between a moral and a criminal code? I think we must be weary of the naive desire to make law relieve us of the pains of responsible choice. If every act were dictated by an article of the Criminal Code, rather than one's conscience and moral sense, human beings would become legal objects. — Prostitution should be fought but the judges should be kept out of it. — Drug addiction should not entail legal prosecution. Otherwise we may be in for disastrous consequences. People would be afraid to solicit medical help; it would be an impenetrable wall between the drug addicts and those who are able to save them. — Are changes to come in the types of punishment? — The reformatory function of jail is little-more than fiction. Rather the opposite is true. The first "jolt" makes an inveterate criminal who won't stay in society for long. — Even in an ideal penitentiary — if such could be imagined — serving one's time causes serious problems. A cooped-up individual loses friends, family, profession, familiar environment and finds himself or herself a member of a group that is anything but healthy. — But that's not the whole story. Imprisonment, particularly if it is prolonged, undermines one's capacity to make decisions, to control oneself. Set free after long years in jail, one is unfit for freedom, normal life seems incomprehensible and unbearable. One might be unconsciously drawn to the habitual way of life. Around 30 per cent of former inmates are brought back behind bars after new offences, and half of them during their first year at large. — According to sociologists, less than 5 per cent of those sentenced for the first time consider their life in the colony as "normal", whereas the correspondent figure for those serving a second sentence (or more) is 40 per cent. — New penitentiary principles must be introduced. It is real as well as imperative. I believe the solution lies with a differentiation between convicts and separate confinement according to different categories. First time offenders should be kept separately from those with long "case histories"; convicts serving time for particularly grave crimes must not mix with petty delinquents. — Another urgent problem is that of the maximum term of confinement. Scholars propose that the maximum serving time envisaged by the code and by each article be reduced. — The legal profession and sociologists know that the arrest itself, the curtailing of personal freedom, is increasingly perceived as the greatest shock by the offender. It is a traumatic, shameful psychological experience. Hence, petty delinquency, such as hooliganism, should entail not a year or two in jail but up to 6 months in a detention home. |