VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[meganrobyn]

Also, the original question was regarding criminal actions. Civil actions have totally different limitations periods.

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone!

I really need help because my SAC's coming up!!
I just had a few questions that I need some clarification on:

1. I didn't understand this: "If an accused asks for a sentence indication but chooses to not plead guilty, then a different magistrate will ordinarily hear and determine the charge, and the different magistrate will not be bound by the sentence indication."
Sorry if this is pretty straight forward, but I don't understand the part of a 'different magistrate'?

2. There's the argument about whether committal hearings are really good, because even cases that are likely to have a high success rate at trial would still need to be go through the committal process. Is this true though? Does every single case go through a committal process?

3. What does this mean: "The indication of sentence will therefore cap the maximum sentence that could be imposed, as long as the accused (for a summary offence) pleads guilty at the first available opportunity." ?

4. What does it mean when "the legal practioner of the accused will also assist in making submisssions about the appropriate sentence if the accused pleads guilty or is found guilty" ?

5. How do plea negotiations and sentence indications enable greater access to the justice system for an accused?

Thank you so much guys!!

[MathsQuestIsBad]

Hi everyone!

I really need help because my SAC's coming up!!
I just had a few questions that I need some clarification on:

1. I didn't understand this: "If an accused asks for a sentence indication but chooses to not plead guilty, then a different magistrate will ordinarily hear and determine the charge, and the different magistrate will not be bound by the sentence indication."
Sorry if this is pretty straight forward, but I don't understand the part of a 'different magistrate'?

2. There's the argument about whether committal hearings are really good, because even cases that are likely to have a high success rate at trial would still need to be go through the committal process. Is this true though? Does every single case go through a committal process?

3. What does this mean: "The indication of sentence will therefore cap the maximum sentence that could be imposed, as long as the accused (for a summary offence) pleads guilty at the first available opportunity." ?

4. What does it mean when "the legal practioner of the accused will also assist in making submisssions about the appropriate sentence if the accused pleads guilty or is found guilty" ?

5. How do plea negotiations and sentence indications enable greater access to the justice system for an accused?

Thank you so much guys!!

Hey literal neighbour,

1. When an accused pleads not guilty to a sentence indication, a new Magistrate is listed to hear the case in an ordinary manner. When the other Magistrate gives a sentence indication, the sentencing that the Magistrate has set out is legally binding so no sanction can be greater. However, in the case that a new Magistrate is listed, the legally binding sentencing indication is disregarded.

2. Yes, all cases that are destined to be heard at the VCC or VSC must go through committal proceedings in the case that the accused pleads not guilty. Indictable offences heard summarily do not have the formalities of committal proceedings as they are heard summarily.

3. Links back to Q1, but the sentencing indication gives an indication of the harshest possible sanction for the accused, e.g. custodial sentence. When the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate who gave the sentence indication cannot give a sentence that is harsher than what is outlined in the indication.

4.  I'm not too sure about this, but I believe it has to do with plea negotiations. Sort of the idea that the defendant will plead guilty if certain charges are dropped and a lighter sentence is given.

5. As plea negotiations have the aim of trying to get an early plea and conviction, it frees up court costs and time which means that cases can be heard at a quicker rate, thus allowing greater access as costs are reduced and so are waiting times. Same with plea negotiations, sentencing indications provide greater access as it allows the Magistrate to set out a sentencing discount to encourage persons to plead guilty earlier. So again, it deals with time factors and time means money.

Hope that helped! I know how damn studious you are, I know you're gonna ace this one, neighbour!

[MissSmiley]

Hey literal neighbour,

1. When an accused pleads not guilty to a sentence indication, a new Magistrate is listed to hear the case in an ordinary manner. When the other Magistrate gives a sentence indication, the sentencing that the Magistrate has set out is legally binding so no sanction can be greater. However, in the case that a new Magistrate is listed, the legally binding sentencing indication is disregarded.

2. Yes, all cases that are destined to be heard at the VCC or VSC must go through committal proceedings in the case that the accused pleads not guilty. Indictable offences heard summarily do not have the formalities of committal proceedings as they are heard summarily.

3. Links back to Q1, but the sentencing indication gives an indication of the harshest possible sanction for the accused, e.g. custodial sentence. When the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate who gave the sentence indication cannot give a sentence that is harsher than what is outlined in the indication.

4.  I'm not too sure about this, but I believe it has to do with plea negotiations. Sort of the idea that the defendant will plead guilty if certain charges are dropped and a lighter sentence is given.

5. As plea negotiations have the aim of trying to get an early plea and conviction, it frees up court costs and time which means that cases can be heard at a quicker rate, thus allowing greater access as costs are reduced and so are waiting times. Same with plea negotiations, sentencing indications provide greater access as it allows the Magistrate to set out a sentencing discount to encourage persons to plead guilty earlier. So again, it deals with time factors and time means money.

Hope that helped! I know how damn studious you are, I know you're gonna ace this one, neighbour!

Says you neighbour??!! You're the one who'll ace it
Thanks so much for giving the time to explain me this!!
Really needed it!! Of course it helped!

[rachaelllll]

What are the differences between CLCs and Legal aid?

[Poet]

Hi rachaelllll,

CLCs (Community Legal Centres) are local centres that typically deal with small civil disputes. They have different divisions (e.g. Youth Law) and are more specialised to the community they're involved in. They give out free information to the community, but do not get involved in more serious cases.
Victoria Legal Aid is a large corporation that deals with more major disputes and defends people in criminal cases. They are more widespread, but do not offer specialised help to youth, etc., unless there is a reason (such as lack of money, immigrant, etc.)

This is just a brief overview, but I hope it helps clear things up for you.

[MissSmiley]

What are the differences between CLCs and Legal aid?

Welcome to Atarnotes!!
Right now, I can think of these differences, but will add later if I think of some more

1. VLA is a government agency whereas CLC is an independent organisation which has branches (specialist and general), unlike VLA
2. CLCs don't have their own eligibility tests (like the means, assests test) like VLA has, but CLCs will only provide legal assistance if people are eligible by VLA's tests. So in this way, people are still exposed to the tests, but not through CLCs
3. CLC's rarely take criminal matters! They only help with minor criminal matters. (unlike VLA)
4. Duty lawyers from the CLC may only offer assistance for urgent matters and for people whose matters will be completed in one day. But VLA duty lawyers can offer legal rep for Magistrates and Children's Court people whose matters are heard on that day (so no time limit, but can't offer for indictable offences)
5. CLC is more focussed on helping in the lead-up to the trial (I always think this!) whereas VLA helps before and during the processes.

As I said, this is a starting point. Will add more if anything pops up

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone!

Please would love any response, because my SAC's in 3 days!!

Just a few questions,
Fines can be sanctioned for Level 2 offences (rape, aggravated burglary, armed robbery, sexual offences) but are they sanctioned along with a prison term?
Because getting away with rape, etc by only paying $460 000 just won't be fair will it?
So are fines sanctioned along with a prison term?
If the combination is not sanctioned and just a fine is, then it's extremely sad and worrying because people who commit these crimes should receive both!!

2. what could be one problem in relation to sanctioning that involves cost or time?
I didn't get the "sanctioning" part? Could we talk about the process leading up to the sanctioning? (e.g. committal hearing)?
Or is it just the final stage where a sanction is given? - but this is gonna make it a bit hard.

3. If a question asks for e.g. evaluate how something upholds the principles of justice and this question is say for 6-8 marks, would you need to analyse all three? (fairness, equality and access)?
I get how you can link things back to all 3, but sometimes you can run the risk of writing something unclear and irrelevant to a principle. So in this case, would you still get marks if you talked about 2 principles? But still have 3 paras?

Thanks guys ! Would love to get a response!!

[MathsQuestIsBad]

Welcome to Atarnotes!!
Right now, I can think of these differences, but will add later if I think of some more

1. VLA is a government agency whereas CLC is an independent organisation which has branches (specialist and general), unlike VLA
2. CLCs don't have their own eligibility tests (like the means, assests test) like VLA has, but CLCs will only provide legal assistance if people are eligible by VLA's tests. So in this way, people are still exposed to the tests, but not through CLCs
3. CLC's rarely take criminal matters! They only help with minor criminal matters. (unlike VLA)
4. Duty lawyers from the CLC may only offer assistance for urgent matters and for people whose matters will be completed in one day. But VLA duty lawyers can offer legal rep for Magistrates and Children's Court people whose matters are heard on that day (so no time limit, but can't offer for indictable offences)
5. CLC is more focussed on helping in the lead-up to the trial (I always think this!) whereas VLA helps before and during the processes.

As I said, this is a starting point. Will add more if anything pops up

Definitely an excellent post, but CLCs are half privatised and half government funded. They're not a corporation either, they aren't taxed so they're kinda a government organisation.

[MathsQuestIsBad]

Hi everyone!

Please would love any response, because my SAC's in 3 days!!

Just a few questions,
Fines can be sanctioned for Level 2 offences (rape, aggravated burglary, armed robbery, sexual offences) but are they sanctioned along with a prison term?
Because getting away with rape, etc by only paying $460 000 just won't be fair will it?
So are fines sanctioned along with a prison term?
If the combination is not sanctioned and just a fine is, then it's extremely sad and worrying because people who commit these crimes should receive both!!

2. what could be one problem in relation to sanctioning that involves cost or time?
I didn't get the "sanctioning" part? Could we talk about the process leading up to the sanctioning? (e.g. committal hearing)?
Or is it just the final stage where a sanction is given? - but this is gonna make it a bit hard.

3. If a question asks for e.g. evaluate how something upholds the principles of justice and this question is say for 6-8 marks, would you need to analyse all three? (fairness, equality and access)?
I get how you can link things back to all 3, but sometimes you can run the risk of writing something unclear and irrelevant to a principle. So in this case, would you still get marks if you talked about 2 principles? But still have 3 paras?

Thanks guys ! Would love to get a response!!

Hey literal neighbour again,

1. Usually sentences are singular in that it's either a fine, imprisonment, CCO etc. In the case for sexual assault, it varies significantly especially when you're taking into account aggravating/mitigating factors. So the sanctions for sexual assault are quite dynamic across the country but in Victoria, they tend to be prison sentences only as outlined in the Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Act 2016 Sect. [19]. Also remember the five purposes of sanctions, the judge would have total discretion over the sentencing and I would trust that they would give appropriate sanctions.

2. 'Sanctioning' is not a pre-trial procedure, sanctioning itself is related to sentencing which is practically the last step in any criminal case where an accused pleads or is found guilty. I don't think there are any 'problems' with sanctioning, sanctioning is what the prosecution looks forward to the most in the end and sanctioning is where justice is usually served. It's simply integral of the CJS.

3. It's ironic that you ask this when you've got a 95 under you sleeve and in particular that I got lower than you. I'll leave this to the others since I'm not the one to be answering this! Haha!!!

Anyway, good luck, we'll smash it!

[MissSmiley]

Hey literal neighbour again,

1. Usually sentences are singular in that it's either a fine, imprisonment, CCO etc. In the case for sexual assault, it varies significantly especially when you're taking into account aggravating/mitigating factors. So the sanctions for sexual assault are quite dynamic across the country but in Victoria, they tend to be prison sentences only as outlined in the Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences) Act 2016 Sect. [19]. Also remember the five purposes of sanctions, the judge would have total discretion over the sentencing and I would trust that they would give appropriate sanctions.

2. 'Sanctioning' is not a pre-trial procedure, sanctioning itself is related to sentencing which is practically the last step in any criminal case where an accused pleads or is found guilty. I don't think there are any 'problems' with sanctioning, sanctioning is what the prosecution looks forward to the most in the end and sanctioning is where justice is usually served. It's simply integral of the CJS.

3. It's ironic that you ask this when you've got a 95 under you sleeve and in particular that I got lower than you. I'll leave this to the others since I'm not the one to be answering this! Haha!!!

Anyway, go
od luck, we'll smash it!

thanks a lot for the help and boost neighbour! I'm sure we'll be fine

Just re.
2. That was the actual question from somewhere! "what could be one problem in relation to sanctioning that involves cost or time?"
suggest a reform or something I don't remember.
That's why I thought just like you, why would there be a problem? That's why I was thinking of events leading up to it then there sure are problems committal and pre-trial procedures as we all know! 
But hang on, we could discuss three different sanctions in three separate paras now that I think about it! + link them to their purposes and then evaluate
I really don't know! Ah this is stuck in my head now!!

But this is a call out to anyone else that can help!!

also just asking my third question again if people have any idea or have come across writing such an answer:

3. If a question asks for e.g. evaluate how something upholds the principles of justice and this question is say for 6-8 marks, would you need to analyse all three? (fairness, equality and access)?
I get how you can link things back to all 3, but sometimes you can run the risk of writing something unclear and irrelevant to a principle. So in this case, would you still get marks if you talked about 2 principles? But still have 3 paras?

Thank you so much neighbour and everyone!!
I'd love to hear some thoughts about these 2 questions!

[filo.hanna]

Hey, I'm a year 10 student and i just completed my first 1&2 Legal SAC two weeks ago and i just received my results. It says i got '3.M' does anyone know what that means? and if so, could you tell me around what percentage that is.
Thanks

[MissSmiley]

Hey, I'm a year 10 student and i just completed my first 1&2 Legal SAC two weeks ago and i just received my results. It says i got '3.M' does anyone know what that means? and if so, could you tell me around what percentage that is.
Thanks

Hey! Welcome to Atarnotes!!
You know this is really really weird that it says that for your result! Never have I heard of that before!!
But now this is very funny. I tried searching up 'how to read marks' and then said '3.M' and the first website that Google gave me was Monash university's 'how to read results' page!!
And on there, it says M means merit. Haha!! I find your teacher to be so authentic in the way that they're giving you marks!!  They're clearly replicating the Uni marking scheme!!
Here is the website by the way:
https://www.monash.edu/exams/results/results-legend
Just scroll down until you find the M.

Don't know what percentage it is though! Also I can't figure out what the 3 means if M means merit...

Anyway, don't take me seriously if I've mentioned complete nonsense, but it was pretty funny for me! 

Good luck with 1/2 !! (especially now that it's the new study design You'll be more comfortable than us (Year 12s) next year because we only got introduced to it this year

[abbychambers]

Hey, I was wondering how to answer this question?

Contrast a sanction with a sentence.

Thanks

[MathsQuestIsBad]

thanks a lot for the help and boost neighbour! I'm sure we'll be fine

Just re.
2. That was the actual question from somewhere! "what could be one problem in relation to sanctioning that involves cost or time?"
suggest a reform or something I don't remember.
That's why I thought just like you, why would there be a problem? That's why I was thinking of events leading up to it then there sure are problems committal and pre-trial procedures as we all know! 
But hang on, we could discuss three different sanctions in three separate paras now that I think about it! + link them to their purposes and then evaluate
I really don't know! Ah this is stuck in my head now!!

But this is a call out to anyone else that can help!!

also just asking my third question again if people have any idea or have come across writing such an answer:

3. If a question asks for e.g. evaluate how something upholds the principles of justice and this question is say for 6-8 marks, would you need to analyse all three? (fairness, equality and access)?
I get how you can link things back to all 3, but sometimes you can run the risk of writing something unclear and irrelevant to a principle. So in this case, would you still get marks if you talked about 2 principles? But still have 3 paras?

Thank you so much neighbour and everyone!!
I'd love to hear some thoughts about these 2 questions!

With Q3, principles implies plural so just two principles are enough. I wouldn't try to force all three, it's better to focus on the two and elaborate a lot, it's the content and explanation that counts more than anything. Rarely does a principle, feature or people in the CJS cover all three principles and this is totally relevant to the SAC you'll be sitting tomorrow.

Q2, I know I'm doing this backwards but I'm genuinely a bit troubled with this haha. I think primarily with sentencing, taking into account aggravating and mitigating circumstances can be time consuming especially trying to get character reports and referrals to support that. I really don't think it's possible to reform sentencing so yeah, I don't know how to help you with that.

GL!