BSBLEG417 Evidence Law Case Study Assignment Solutions with Sample
- Course Code: BSBLEG417
- Course Title: Criminal Law
- Referencing Styles : Open
- Words : 3500
- University: Australian Catholic University
- Country: AU
Study in Law and Looking for BSBLEG417 Evidence Law Assignment Questions and Answers? At Assignment Task, we offer the best evidence law assignment writing services by our top ratted law experts. Contact our service and let us help you. We have a team of qualified writers for your Law Assignments Help. Get 100% Plagiarism Free Content and On-Time Delivery.
We require your assistance to analyze two (2) separate criminal law matters that our Firm is acting on. I am reviewing the criminal law issues. You are required to consider the issues relating to evidence law only. Matter 1 Phillip Meen has instructed our Firm to act on his behalf. He has been accused of murdering his wife, Catriona Meen on 2 September last year. Catriona was driving a 4WD motor vehicle on their farm in the outskirts of Coffs Harbour when she was shot in the back of the head. Philip says there are no witnesses. Only Philip, Catriona and their dog were present. Philip claims the death was accidental.
He states that the dog was unrestrained in the vehicle and jumped on a rifle that was on the back seat, causing it to discharge and kill Catriona. The prosecution intend to prove that Philip deliberately murdered Catriona and intend to adduce evidence as follows:
verbal assaults and quarrels between Philip and Catriona which occurred over 18 months ago;
evidence from a farmer who lives on a neighboring property, giving his opinion about how a rifle could discharge in a motor vehicle in off-road conditions; evidence from Catriona’s close friend about her conversations with Catriona in the weeks just prior to her death, particularly focussing upon Catriona’s comments that Philip repeatedly said to her:
“I’m sick of you – your time here is nearly up!” Matter 2 The firm is representing Ima Goodguy in a criminal matter in the District Court of New South Wales at Azure Beach. Ima is accused of armed robbery of a petrol station on the Pacific Highway. Ima has instructed us to enter a plea of ‘not guilty’.
On the first day of trial, the following circumstances arose:
the Judge orders Ima’s wife and father to give evidence the prosecution is allowed to adduce evidence of two similar matters committed by Ima as the probative value outweighed the prejudicial value the prosecution attempt to adduce evidence about quarrels Ima had with the petrol station owner during a three month period, approximately three years ago the prosecution attempt to adduce evidence of an opinion expressed by a witness that the ‘getaway’ vehicle was moving at approximately 100km/hr. However, that witness was in a vehicle travelling at 60km/hr in the opposite direction, at night Ima is giving evidence at trial. He is handed a Bible and told to ‘repeat after me, I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God’. Ima whispers…
“I’m an atheist, is that okay?” to which the Court Officer replies, “It’s okay, the judge is a Christian and I am sure he will prefer you swear on the Bible”.
i. Analyze the circumstance and identify the key issue pertaining to that evidence.
ii. Evaluate whether that evidence is relevant and/or admissible. In your evaluation, apply the relevant principle of evidence law to identify what submissions and/or objections could be made about that evidence during the hearing?
iii. Identify the consequence of that evidence not being relevant and/or admissible.
iv. Assess why the issue is significant in terms of evidence law.
v. Ensure you cite relevant legislation and case law. vi. Ensure you cite all secondary sources you refer to (such as textbooks, journal articles etc.).