1

What is the difference between a question of law and a question of fact? Determine whether each of the following questions would need to be decided by a judge or by the jury: Should a persuasive precedent from a case in the Supreme Court of Western Australia be applied in the case? Was the accused the person wearing the ski mask who held up the petrol station? Did the witness to the offence really see all the events clearly? Which sections of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic.) are relevant to alleged offences in this case? Was the defendant really at home with his girlfriend at the time the offences were committed, as he claims he was? Did a legal contract exist between the parties as claimed by the plaintiff in a civil case? If a legal contract did exist, did the defendant breach that contract? 2

 Copy out diagram located at the bottom of page 381  Provides for a good summary 3

 Jury decides a verdict based on the facts of the case.  Judge rules on issues of law  Makes jury aware of legal principles  IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE – Isn't IT. So why are they advised???  Is it all about fairness to the accused???  A charge to the jury is the final summary made by a judge to a jury.  It is made after closing addresses by both sides  Key issues of law and evidence are explained 4

Judge may require the jury to retire from the trial for a number of reasons that include;  Discussion of a legal principle not raised previously Why? - Jurors can become confused by legal argument  Legal argument relating the admissibility of some evidence  Judge may supress the names of parties and witnesses involved in a trial.  Can also conduct a closed hearing i.e., a trial not open to the public.  Can ban information becoming public if the court believes it may prejudice potential jurors 5

 orship-underbelly-why-couldn-t-we- watch-it/w1/i / orship-underbelly-why-couldn-t-we- watch-it/w1/i /  Because Underbelly gave an explanation of the murder, and contained a mixture of factual and fictional dialogue which would not be made clear to a juror. The Court found the series could potentially expose the jury to not only facts (which might be inadmissible) but also to fictional conversations and events which might confuse the facts presented at the trial.  The ban on Underbelly expired when a Supreme Court jury convicted Evangelos Goussis of the 2004 killing of Lewis Moran in May  derbelly-to-screen-after-ruling bqz.html derbelly-to-screen-after-ruling bqz.html  Supreme Court Justice Peter Vickery granted permission for Nine to immediately screen a version of the five episodes, which have been edited for Victorian viewers.  A suppression order on the series imposed by Supreme Court judge Betty King on February 15 expired in May, when a jury found Evangelos Goussis guilty of murdering underworld figure Lewis Moran in Melbourne in March

 Complete questions 1 – 10 (Page 382)  Commence Farquharson Case study (Page 395)  rquharson,0.jpg&imgrefurl= life/2007/11/16/ html&usg=__A9Ginyaeyv8Wq9Kki38N_5PMmRQ=&h=300&w= 260&sz=28&hl=en&start=19&zoom=1&tbnid=7z5XoEckL4vRMM:&tbnh=116&tbnw=101&ei=wC EjUovlHom8kAWE1YG4Cw&itbs=1&sa=X&ved=0CFAQrQMwEg 7