|
PART 3. UNLIKE FISHERMAN, THE GOLFER HAS NOTHING |
1. Work in pairs. In the text below find the words that correspond to the definitions given in the box. |
A. object produced in a court as evidence; B. most important; C. thing; D. written promise to pay a specific sum of money; E. list of goods/services provided and the sum to be paid; F. document with instructions what to do after one’s death; G. means of mass communication; H. things included in something; I. push a knife into one’s body; J. observer; K. reason; L. must go through; M. proving that something is true; N. carrying out; O. person's particular style of writing; P. trademark of a company; Q. printed matter pubhshed at regular intervals; R. officially confirmed; S. earliest, from which copies may be made. |
Besides witnesses, exhibits are the other principal form of evidence in a trial. The four main types of exhibits are real objects (guns, blood, machinery), items used for demonstration (diagrams, models, maps), writings (contracts, promissory notes, checks, letters), and records (private business and public records). Documentary evidence is any evidence introduced at a trial in the form of documents. Although this term is often understood to mean only writings on paper (such as an invoice, a contract or a will), the term actually include any media by which information can be preserved. Photographs, tape recordings, films and printed e-mails are all forms of documentary evidence. A piece of evidence is not documentary evidence if it is presented for some purpose other than the examination of the contents of the document. For example, if a blood-covered letter is presented only to show that the defendant stabbed the author of the letter when he was MTiting it, then the evidence is physical evidence, not documentary evidence. However, a film of the murder taking place would be documentary evidence (just as a written description of the event from an eyewitness). If the content of that same letter is then introduced to show the motive for the murder, then the evidence would be both physical and documentary. Documentary evidence is subject to specific forms of authentication, usually through the testimony of an eyewitness to the execution of the document, or the testimony of a witness able to identify the handwriting of the supposed author. There are several documents which have generally been considered to be self-authenticating documents. These include commercial labels, newspapers and other periodicals, official publications, certified copies of public records and some others. Documentary evidence is also subject to the best evidence rule, which requires that when writings or recordings are introduced as evidence in a trial, the original writing or recording must be produced as the ‘best evidence’. |
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 285 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
2, Substitute the italicized words and word combinations in the following sentences with the words you have found in Activity 1. Proving that something is true is the process by which objects produced in a court as evidence, that is most important things in a trial, such as written promises to pay specific sums of money, lists of goods/services provided and the sums to be paid, documents with instructions what to do after one’s death, must go through the requirements of the best evidence rule, according to which the documentary evidence should be presented in its earliest form, from which copies may be made, and it should also be officially confirmed. However, some kinds of documents are considered to be self-authenticating, such as company trademarks, printed matter published at regular intervals, or things generally included into their products by other means of mass communication. When presenting handwritten evidence, such as personal letters, the rules of evidence may require an observer who could confirm not only the person’s particular style of writing, but also the fact of that person’s actual carrying out of the document, as well as the reason for doing it. 3. Listen to the text on exhibits and fill in the gaps. You will hear the text twice. |
|
As with witness testimony, the admissibility of exhibits is governed by rules of________________ (1) and is within the discretion of the _____________ (2) judge. One important benchmark of admissibility is relevance. Federal Rules of Evidence state, in part, ‘All relevant evidence is ___________________ (3), except as otherwise provided.’ The goal of this rule is to allow parties to _____________ (4) all the evidence that bears on the _____________ (5) to be decided, and to keep out all evidence that is |
immaterial or lacks probative value. Evidence offered to help prove something that is not at issue is_________________ (6). For example, the fact that a defendant attends church every week is immaterial, and thus__________ (7), to a charge of running a red light. Probative____________________ (8) is a tendency to make the existence of any material fact more or less probable. For instance, evidence that a murder _______________ (9) ate spaghetti on the day of the murder would normally be _____________ (10) because people who eat spaghetti are not more or less likely to _____________ (11) murder compared with other people. However, if spaghetti sauce was found at the_______________ (12) scene, the fact that the defendant ate spaghetti that day would have probative value and would thus be__________________ (13) evidence. Evidence is not relevant unless its______________ (14) can be demonstrated. A letter in which the defendant admits her guilt in a tax fraud trial is inadmissible unless the_____________________ (15) can first show that the defendant actually wrote it. Bloodstained clothing is___________________ (16) without some connection to the issues of the __________________ (17), such as evidence that the clothing belonged to the _____________ _(18) murderer. The process of linking a piece of evidence to a case — of |
authenticating or identifying the |
_(19) |
is frequently called laying a foundation. would find it more probably true than not true that the evidence is what the________________________ (21) |
Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, a |
offering it claims it to be. To provide foundation, the party offering the |
(22) need |
only establish that the item is what it says to be. The most basic way to lay an evidentiar} foundation is to demonstrate that a______________ (23) has personal knowledge. For example, the witness may________________ (24) that he wrote the letter, or saw the___________________ (25) sign the contract, or found the bullet in the kitchen. When the evidence is an object, the witness must testify that the object introduced at the___________________ (26) is in substantially the same condition as it was when it was witnessed. |
4. Explain the meaning of the following word-combinations related to the law of evidence from the text. Witness testimony, admissibility of exhibits, rules of evidence, discretion of the trial judge, bear on the issue, immaterial, probative value, charge of running a red light, murder defendant, commit murder, murder scene, authenticity, admit one’s guilt, tax fraud trial, reasonable juror, lay a foundation, witness has personal knowledge, sign the contract, found the bullet, substantially the same condition. 5. Work in pairs. Fill in the table below on the basis of exercises 1 and 3. Then use the table to tell your partner everything you know about presenting exhibits at the trial. |
' PRESENTATON OF E5fflIBITS |
The four main types of exhibits |
Examples of real objects |
Examples of demonstration items |
Examples of writings |
What does documentary evidence include? |
Difference between documentary and physical evidence |
How is documentary evidence authentication carried out? |
What are self-authenticating documents? |
presentation Щ.ЕХШВІТ8 AND RULES OF EVIDENCE |
What is the goal of the rule: "All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided?" |
What is the connection between evidence relevancy and authenticity? |
What is the most basic way to provide foundation? |
6. Write a survey report on the main principles of presenting exhibits at a trial in the US law system. Use the texts in this part of the lesson or any other materials you may come across. See also: Survey Report in the Recommendations on Creative Writing Work. 7. Translate into English Однією 3 головних форм доказів, крім показань свідків, є речові докази. Вони поділяються на чотири головних типи: реальні предмети (вогнепальна зброя, кров, устаткування), наочні засоби (діаграми, моделі, карти місцевості), документи у письмовій формі (договори, боргові зобов’язання, чеки, листи), документи публічного характеру. Документальні докази - це будь-які матеріали, подані в судовому розгляді у формі документів. Разом з документами на паперових носіях (наприклад, рахунок-фактура. |
договір або заповіт) цим терміном також позначають будь-який засіб, за допомогою якого можна зберегти інформацію. Фотографії, магнітофонні записи, фільми й надруковані електронні листи - це форми документальних доказів. Документальні докази підлягають процедурі встановлення автентичності, зазвичай через свідчення очевидця, оформлення документа або за допомогою показання свідка, здатного підтвердити почерк гаданого автора. Деякі види документів не потребують засвідчення автентичності, наприклад торгові знаки, газети та інші періодичні видання, офіційні публікації, засвідчені копії документів публічного характеру, такі як свідоцтво про народження, документи, що мають офіційну печатку органу влади, і деякі інші. Допустимість речових доказів визначається нормами доказового права й виноситься на розсуд судді в судовому слуханні. Одним із важливих критеріїв допустимості доказів є їх релевантність. Сторони мають подати всі докази, що стосуються питання, яке необхідно вирішити, й уникати доказів, що є несуттєвими або тих, що не мають достатньої доказової сили. Доказ не є релеваптним, якщо його автентичність не може бути підтверджена. Лист, у якому відповідач визнає свою вину, в судовому розгляді справи про податкове шахрайство є недопустимим, якщо обвинувачення не доведе спочатку, що його дійсно написав відповідач. Пов’язування доказу зі справою - встановлення автентичності або упізнання - часто називається обґрунтуванням допустимості доказів. Обґрунтування є достатнім, якщо розумно налаштований присяжний з більшою вірогідністю вважав би доказ істинним, а не хибним. Головним способом обґрунтування допустимості доказів є демонстрація обізнаності свідка. Наприклад, свідок може дати показання, що він написав листа, або бачив, як позивач підписав контракт, або знайшов кулю на кухні. Коли доказ є предметом, свідок має засвідчити, що предмет, представлений у судовому розгляді, є в тому ж самому стані, як і тоді, коли він його бачив. |
VOCABULARY ENGLISH - UKRAINIAN |
admissibility of exhibits | допустимість доказів |
authentication | встановлення автентичності |
be subject to | підлягати |
best evidence rule | вимога представлення найкращих доказів |
birth certificate | свідоцтво про народження |
cause of action | підстава для пред’явлення позову |
certified copy | засвідчена копія |
check | чек |
commercial label | торговий знак |
contents | зміст |
documentary evidence | документальні докази |
duplicate | дублікат |
електронний лист | |
execution of a document | оформлення документа |
exhibit | речовий доказ |
forgery | підробка |
genuine | справжній (непідроблений) |
handwriting | почерк |
have personal knowledge | знати особисто |
identify | упізнавати |
immaterial evidence | доказ, що не має суттєвого значення для справи |
inaccuracy | неточність |
invoice | рахунок-фактура |
law of evidence | доказове право |
lay a foundation | обгрунтувати (допустимість доказів) |
machinery | устаткування |
medium | засіб |
mislead | завести на хибний шлях |
motion picture | фільм |
murder scene | місце вбивства |
negative | негатив |
periodical | періодичне видання |
physical evidence | речовий доказ |
probative value | доказова сила |
promissory note | боргове зобов’язання |
property- | властивість |
public record | документ публічного характеру |
purported author | гаданий автор |
reasonable juror | розумно мислячий присяжний |
recording | запис |
relevance | релевантність |
require | вимагати |
rule of evidence | норми доказового права |
run a red light | проїхати на червоне світло |
seal | печатка |
self-authenticating | такий, що не потребує засвідчення |
stab | вдарити (гострою зброєю) |
tape recording | магнітофонний запис |
tax fraud | податкове шахрайство |
writing | документ, викладений у письмовій формі |
X- ray | рентгенівський знімок |
UKRAINIAN - ENGLISH |
боргове зобов’язання вдарити (гострою зброєю) вимагати вимога представлення найкращих доказів властивість встановлення автентичності гаданий автор доказ, що не має суттєвого значення для справи доказова сила доказове право документ публічного характеру документ, викладений у письмовій формі документальні докази допустимість доказів дублікат електронний лист завести на хибний шлях запис засвідчена копія засіб зміст знати особисто магнітофонний запис місце вбивства негатив неточність |
promissory note stab require best evidence rule property authentication purported author immaterial evidence probative value law of evidence public record writing documentary evidence admissibility of exhibits duplicate mislead recording certified copy medium contents have personal knowledge tape recording murder scene negative inaccuracy |
норми доказового права обґрунтувати (допустимість доказів) оформлення документа періодичне видання печатка підлягати підробка підстава для пред’явлення позову податкове шахрайство почерк проїхати на червоне світло рахунок-фактура релевантність рентгенівський знімок речовий доказ розумно мислячий присяжний свідоцтво про народження справжній (непідроблений) такий, що не потребує засвідчення торговий знак упізнавати устаткування фільм чек |
rule of evidence lay a foundation execution of a document periodical seal be subject to forgery cause of action tax fraud handwriting run a red light invoice relevance X-ray exhibit; physical evidence reasonable juror birth certificate genuine self-authenticating commercial label identify machinery motion picture check |
LESSON 4. OUR DECISION IS *MAYBP - AND THAT’S FINAL |
|
PART 1. THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO EVERY |
1. Work in pairs. In the text below find the words that correspond to the definitions given in the box. |
A. closing argument; B. legal adviser conducting a case; C. repeat; D. person or body responsible for deciding a case; E. importance; D. believable; E. discussion of the case by the jury before the verdict; F. usual; G. shocking; H. very important; I. statement which gives reasons why the accusation is untrue; J. made shorter; K. refrain from using a right to; L. confirm; M. trustworthiness; N. strongly encourage; O. prevent; P. transfer; Q. responsibility; R. providing evidence; S. indicate something in an indirect way. |
A closing argument, summation, or summing up is the concluding statement of each party's counsel (often called an attorney in the United States) reiterating the important arguments for the Trier of fact, often the jury, in a court case. A closing argument occurs after the presentation of evidence. Trial lawyers put great emphasis on their closing argument because it is their last chance to be persuasive before the judge or jury begins deliberations. A closing argument may not contain any new information and may only use evidence introduced at trial. It is not customary to raise objections during closing arguments, except for egregious behavior. However, such objections, when made, can prove critical later in order to preserve appellate issues. The plaintiff is generally entitled to open the argument. The defendant usually goes second. The plaintiff or prosecution is usually then permitted a final rebuttal argument. In some jurisdictions, however, this form is condensed, and the prosecution or plaintiff goes second, after the defense, with no rebuttals. Either party may waive their opportunity to present a closing argument. During closing arguments, counsels may not (among other restrictions) vouch for the credibility of witnesses, indicate their personal opinions of the case, comment on the absence of evidence that they themselves have caused to be excluded, or attempt to exhort the jury to urational, emotional behavior. |
In a criminal law case, the prosecution will restate all the evidence which helps prove each 2. Substitute the italicized words and word combinations in the following sentences with In the majority of cases it is usual that the closing arguments precede the judge’s instructions to 3. Listen to the text on closing arguments and fill in the gaps. You will hear the text twice. ______ (1) discuss the evidence |
The lawyers’ closing arguments or____________ and properly drawn____________ (2). The lawyers cannot talk about issues outside the__________ (3) or about evidence that was not presented. The judge usually indicates to the lawyers before_______________ (4) begin which |
|
instmctions he or she intends to give the |
case,the |
_____ (5). In their closing arguments the lawyers can comment on the jury instmctions and relate them to the__________ (6). The lawyer for the_____________ (7) usually goes first. The prosecutor sums up and comments on the evidence in the most _________ (8) light for his or her side, showing how it proved what he or she had to prove to prevail in the case. After the________________ (9) has made its (10) then presents its closing arguments. The defense lawyer usually answers _________ (11) made in the govemment’s argument, points out_________________ (12) in their case and _________ (13) the facts favorable to his/her_______________ (14). Because the government has the _________ (15), the lawyer for that side is then entitled to make a concluding argument, sometimes called a____________ (16). This is a chance to respond to the defendant’s points and make one final____________ (17) to the jury. The govemment can present rebuttal witnesses or evidence to__________ (18) evidence presented by the defendant. This may include only evidence not presented in the case initially, or a new witness who ______________________ (19) the defendant's witnesses. Occasionally the defense may choose to waive a closing statement. In this case, the govemment____________________ (20) to make a second argument. Closing arguments and rebuttals vary in _________ (23). Summations lasting an hour or more are ____________________ (24). Depending on |
the |
_____ (25) of a case, the entire summation period may last several days, particularly in _________ (26) where numerous witnesses and difficult scientific evidence have been presented. Ultimately, the length of a closing argument is left to the________________ (27) of the judge, who may _________ (28) a time limit. |
4. Explain the meaning of the following word-combinations related to closing arguments from the text. Summations; properly drawn inferences; issues outside the case; indicate to the lawyers; intend to do something; relate instructions to the evidence; in the most favorable light; prevail, make one’s case; point out defects in someone’s case; have the burden of proof; be entitled; rebuttal; make one final appeal to the jury; refute evidence, contradict a witness; to make a second argument; vary in duration; the entire summation period; jury trials; uhimately; be left to the discretion of the judge; impose a time limit. 5. Work in pairs. Fill in the table below on the basis of exercises 1 and 3. Then use the table to tell your partner everything you know about closing arguments at the trial. |
■ CLOSING ARGUMENTS IN GENERAL '- | |
What is a closing argument? |
|
When does a closing argument take place? |
|
Why is a closing argument important? |
|
Can objections be raised during closing arguments? Why? |
|
What is a condensed form of closing arguments? |
|
Things the counsels may not do during closing arguments |
|
Things the prosecution may not do during closing arguments |
|
| |
What do the lawyers discuss in their closing arguments? |
|
What does the judge do before the closing arguments? |
|
What does the prosecutor discuss in his closing argument? |
|
What does the defense lawyer discuss in his closing argument? |
|
What does the prosecutor discuss in his rebuttal? |
|
How can the prosecutor lose the right to make a second argument? |
|
How long may the closing arguments last? Why? |
|
6. Work in pairs. Rephrase the following sentences using modal verbs or their equivalents. There is an example at the beginning (0). L. During closing arguments, it is forbidden for counsels to indicate their personal opinions of the case. Durins closins arsuments. counsels may not indicate their personal opinions of the case. |
|
1. I strongly advise you to avoid stating that you have a 2. The govemment is allowed to present rebuttal witnesses or 3. The defense counsel did a wrong thing when she waived her |
4. It is impossible that summations have been lasting for several days. 5.1 suggest that we present a new witness who contradicts the defendant's witnesses. 6. It is not necessary for the defense to prove the innocence of the defendant. 7. It is certain that in his closing argument the prosecutor has commented on the jury instmctions and related them to the evidence. 8. The defense counsel succeeded in pointing out essential defects in the govemment’s case. 9. Perhaps the length of a closing argument will be left to the discretion of the judge. 10. The prosecution is not allowed to use a defendant's exercise of his Fifth Amendment right to silence as evidence of guilt. |
7. Write a survey report on the closing arguments in the US law system. Use the texts in this part of the lesson or any other materials you may come across. See also: Survey Report in the Recommendations on Creative Writing Work. 8. Translate into English У більшості юрисдикцій заключні промови обвинувача й захисника виголошуються пїє до того, як суддя проінструктує журі. Заключні промови є дуже важливими, бо вдала промова може суттєво вплинути на результат наради присяжних, яка починається одразу після заключних промов. Як для обвинувача, так і для захисника заключна промова дає можливість ш;е раз оглянути показання свідків та речові докази, ш;о розглядалися під час судового слухання, а також аргументувати бажані висновки присяжних. Вважається, що заключні промови мають носити дискусійний доказовий характер, а отже, адвокати сторін зазвичай апелюють до здорового глузду, піддають сумніву мотиви й надійність небажаних свідків, звертаються до журі з емоційними закликами. Першим зазвичай виступає адвокат з боку держави. Після обґрунтування своєї позиції обвинувачем захисник виступає з власною заключною промовою, намагаючись |
поставити ПІД сумнів заяви протилежної сторони, вказуючи на недоліки ії позиції та підсумовуючи факти на користь свого підзахисного. Оскільки тягар доведення покладений на державу, обвинувачеві надається право навести остаточні зустрічні аргументи. Це дозволяє відповісти на аргументи захисту й ще раз, востаннє, звернутися до присяжних. Аби поставити під сумнів аргументи відповідача, державі дозволяється наводити лише ті докази, які досі не подавалися, та викликати тільки тих нових свідків, свідчення яких суперечать змісту заключної промови захисника. Сторона захисту може відмовитися від заключної промови. У такому випадку держава втрачає право на наведення зустрічних аргументів. Існують певні важливі обмеження, що стосуються змісту заключних промов. Хоча адвокату дозволяється енергійно наводити аргументи на користь того чи іншого висновку, неетичним вважається обстоювання своєї особистої думки стосовно вини або невинності відповідача. Так, не дозволяються заяви про обґрунтований сумнів щодо вини підзахисного, однак заяви про обґрунтований сумнів щодо доказів, представлених у суді, можуть бути доречними. Інше обмеження стосується рішення відповідача про відмову від свідчення. Якщо відповідач приймає таке рішення, обвинувач не може у своїй заключній промові коментувати цей факт і не може наполягати на тому, що мовчання відповідача свідчить про його вину. VOCABULARY |
ENGLISH - UKRAINIAN |
adverse inference | висновок на користь протилежної сторони |
afford | дозволяти (собі) |
argue for | аргументувати |
argumentative | доказовий |
assert one’s opinion | обстоювати свою думку |
attempt | спроба |
burden of proof | тягар доведення |
closing argument | заключна промова (адвоката сторони) |
common sense | здоровий глузд |
complexity | складність |
condensed | стислий |
contradict | суперечити |
counsel | адвокат |
customary | звичайний |
deliberation | нарада присяжних |
draw inferences | робити висновки |
duration | тривалість |
egregious | кричущий |
emphasis | наголос |
entire | повний (увесь) |
exhort | спонукати |
impact | вплив |
imply | натякати |
impose | накладати (обов’язки тощо) |
indicate | вказувати |
inference | висновок |
intend | мати намір |
limitation | обмеження |
make one’s case | обґрунтувати свою версію справи |
occur | траплятися |
persuasive | переконливий |
plea | прохання |
precede preclude preserve prevail proper properly raise objection reasonable doubt rebuttal rebuttal evidence reiterate shift the burden of proof sum up summation Trier of fact ultimately unethical unfavorable vigorously vital vouch |
передувати запобігати берегти переважати доречний належним чином виставити заперечення обґрунтований сумнів спростування доказ, що спростовує повторювати перекладати (на когось інщого) тягар доведення підсумовувати заключна промова (адвоката сторони) особа (або орган), що вирішує питання факту зрештою неетичний несприятливий енергійно важливий поручитися (за когось тощо) |
UKRAINIAN - ENGLISH |
адвокат аргументувати берегти важливий висновок висновок на користь протилежної сторони виставити заперечення вказувати вплив дозволяти (собі) доказ, що спростовує доказовий доречний енергійно заключна промова (адвоката сторони) запобігати звичайний здоровий глузд зрештою кричущий мати намір наголос накладати (обов’язки тощо) належним чином нарада присяжних натякати неетичний несприятливий обґрунтований сумнів обґрунтувати свою версію справи обмеження обстоювати свою думку |
counsel argue for preserve vital inference adverse inference raise objection indicate impact afford rebuttal evidence argumentative proper vigorously closing argument; summation preclude customary common sense ultimately egregious intend emphasis impose properly deliberation imply unethical unfavorable reasonable doubt make one’s case limitation assert one’s opinion |
особа (або орган), що виріщує питання факту переважати передувати перекладати (на когось іншого) тягар доведення переконливий підсумовувати повний (увесь) повторювати поручитися (за когось тощо) прохання робити висновки складність спонукати спроба спростування стислий суперечити траплятися тривалість тягар доведення |
Trier of fact prevail precede shift the burden of proof persuasive sum up entire reiterate vouch plea draw inferences complexity exhort attempt rebuttal condensed contradict occur duration burden of proof |
|
PART 2. IF AT FIRST YOU DON’T SUCCEED, |
1. Work in pairs. In the text below find the words that correspond to the definitions given in the box. A. group; B.weigh up; C. accusation; D. guiding principles; E. short passage; F. function; G. honest; H. injustice; I. opinion on the basis of incomplete information; J. suppose that something is true without evidence to confirm it; K. conclusion based on guesses rather than knowledge; L. neutrally; M. enquiry; N. having many confusing aspects; O. model; P. basis; Q. conditions connected with an event; R. specific; S. reappear. |
Jury instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors should follow when the jury is deciding a civil or criminal case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the judge, who usually reads them aloud to the jury. These instructions are usually standardized instructions and include such things as how to evaluate the evidence, the standard proof required (beyond a reasonable doubt), the elements of each charge that has to be proved and some guidelines on how to conduct deliberations. Here is an extract from the instruction given to the jury by the judge: “Members of the Jury: Your part in the administration of justice is very important. The parties in this case have come into this court for a trial on issues that have developed and exist l5etween them. It is our duty - mine as judge, and yours as jurors - to see that all parties get a full and fair trial. You have been chosen and sworn as jurors to try the issues of fact presented in this case. You are to perform this duty without bias or prejudice to any party. The law does not permit jurors to be governed by conjecture, surmise, speculation, prejudice, or public opinion in these cases. The parties to this action expect that you will carefully and impartially consider all the evidence in the case and that you will carefully follow the law as stated to you by the Court”. If there is a dispute as to what law applies to the case, the judge will decide what instructions to give. The jury is required to decide the case relying only on the evidence presented at trial, reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence and the applicable law. The jury is not allowed to conduct an extra investigation, or consult other sources or persons. The charge to the jury may take a few minutes, or it may take hours, or even days, in complicated cases. Forty-eight states (Texas and West Virginia are the exceptions) have a basic set of instructions, usually called ‘pattern jury instructions’, which provide the framework for the charge to the jury; sometimes, only names and circumstances have to be filled in for a particular case. Often they are much more complex, although certain elements frequently recur. For instance, if a criminal defendant chooses not to testify, the jury will be instructed not to draw any conclusions from that decision. |
2. Substitute the italicized words and word combinations in the following sentences with Before the jury deliberation, the judge, on the basis of the 'model ушу instructions’, which is a 3. Listen to the text on the jury instructions in US courts and fill in the gaps. You will hear Members of the Jury: Now that you have heard all of the_____________________ (1), it becomes my responsibility to instruct, or charge you, concerning the law that applies to this______________ (2). It is the Judge's duty to consider, determine and explain the rules of law that_______________ (3) in a particular case. It is the Jury’s responsibility and duty to consider and determine the_______________ (4) of the case, that is, what the__________ (5) believes to be the true facts from among all of the evidence in the case. I have no right to tell you which facts are established by the_______________ (6) and any exhibits. You, and only you, are the judges of the facts. It is your____________________________ (7) as jurors to accept and follow the law as contained in these_____ (8), and to apply that law to the facts that you believe have been proved from all of the______________________ (9) in the case. Each instruction is as important as any other. You are not to single out one ________________________ (10) or instruction alone as stating the_________________ (11) and ignore the other instructions or parts of instructions. You are to_______________ (12) and apply these instructions together as a whole and you are to regard each instruction in the light of all others. Any personal___________________ (13) which you, or any of you, may have as to facts not________________ (14) by the evidence in this case cannot properly be considered by you as a_________________ (15) for your verdict. As individuals you may believe that certain facts existed, but as_________________ (16) sworn to try this case and to render a true____________ (17) on the law and the evidence, you can act only upon the evidence which has been properly______________ (18) to you at this trial. You cannot speculate as to what may have happened in the absence of evidence on a given point. If you have any_______________________ (19) opinion as to what the law is, or ought to be, you must put that opinion aside and____________________ (20) and apply the law as it is. In performing your duties as____________________ (21) you must not permit yourself to be influenced or swayed by sympathy, bias,___________________ (22) or favour as to any party. All parties expect that you will carefully and ______________________ (23) consider all of the evidence, accept and follow the law as contained in these instructions, and reach a__________________ (24) verdict, regardless of the consequences. 4. Explain the meaning of the following words and word-combinations related to the jury instructions from the text. Evidence; responsibility; instruct; judge; jury; rules of law; determine the facts; testimony; exhibit; judges of the facts; juror; follow the law; single out a statement; ignore the instructions; apply the instructions together as a whole; regard each instruction in the light of all others; personal opinion; try the case; render; properly introduced; speculate; put an opinion aside; apply the law; perform duties; be influenced by prejudices; consider impartially; reach a verdict; regardless of the consequences. |
---------------------------------------- 299 ------------------------------------------- |
Дата добавления: 2015-09-29; просмотров: 28 | Нарушение авторских прав
| <== предыдущая лекция | | | следующая лекция ==> |