GO ...

LEGAL
Asist. Univ. drd Laura-Rebeca Precup-Stiegelbauer cyp4d@yahoo.com Tel: 0723888647

A 1000 miles trip starts with the first step!

The Tenses
TIMPUL PRESENT SIMPLE every day sometimes always often usually seldom never first firstthen CUVINTE SPECIFICE UTILIZARE -something happens repeatedly -how often something happens -one action follows another -things in general -after the following verbs: verbs: to love, love, to hate, hate, to think etc -future meaning: meaning: Timetables, Timetables, programs FORMULA SHORT INFINITVE HE/SHE/IT + S, ES Exemplu Exemplu la afirmativ afirmativ I work Exemplu la negativ I do not work I don dont work Exemplu la interogativ Do I work? work?

He works

He does not work

Does he work? work?

TIMPUL PRESENT CONTINUOUS

CUVINTE SPECIFICE now at the moment Look! Look! Listen! Listen!

UTILIZARE -something is happening at the same time of speaking or around it - future meaning: meaning: when you have already decided and arranged to do it (a fixed plan, date) -action took place in the past, past, mostly connected with an expression of time (no connection to the present) present)

FORMULA TO BE (AM, ARE, IS) + INFINITIVE + ING

Exemplu la afirmativ I am working. working. Im working. working.

Exemplu la negativ I am not working. working. Im not working. working.

Exemplu la interogativ Am I working? working?

He is working. working. He s working. He working.

He is not working. working. He isn t working. isn working.

Is he working? working?

PAST SIMPLE

last ago in 1990 yesterday

-regular: regular: INFINITIVE + -ED -irregular: irregular: 2nd column of table of irregular verbs

I worked. worked.

I did not work. work. I didn didnt work. work.

Did I work? work?

He worked. worked.

He did not work. work. He didn didnt work. work.

Did he work? work?

TIMPUL PAST CONTINUOUS

CUVINTE SPECIFICE while

UTILIZARE -an action happened in the middle of another action -someone was doing sth. sth. at a certain time (in the past) past) - you do not know whether it was finished or not -you say that sth. sth. has happened or is finished in the past and it has a connection to the present -action started in the past and continues up to the present

FORMULA WAS/WERE + INFINITIVE + ing

Exemplu la afirmativ I was working. working.

Exemplu la negativ I was not working. working. I wasn wasnt working. working.

Exemplu la interogativ Was I working? working?

He was working. working.

He was not working. working. He wasn wasnt working. working.

Was he working? working?

PRESENT PERFECT SIMPLE

just yet never ever already so far up to now since for recently

HAVE/HAS + PAST PARTICIPLE * * (infinitive + -ed) ed) or (3rd column of table of irregular verbs) verbs)

I have worked. worked. Ive worked. worked.

I have not worked. worked. I haven havent worked

Have I worked? worked?

He has worked. worked. He Hes worked

He has not worked. worked. He hasn hasnt worked. worked.

Has he worked? worked?

TIMPUL PRESENT PERFECT CONTINUOUS

CUVINTE SPECIFICE all day the whole day how long since for

UTILIZARE -action began in the past and has just stopped -how long the action has been happening -emphasis: emphasis: length of time of an action -mostly when two actions in a story are related to each other: other: the action which had already happened is put into Past Perfect, the other action into Simple Past the past of the Present Perfect

FORMULA HAVE/HAS + BEEN + INFINITIVE + ING

Exemplu la afirmativ I have been working. working. Ive been working. working. He has been working. working. He Hes been working. working.

Exemplu la negativ I have not been working. working. I haven havent been working. working. He has not been working. working. He hasn hasnt been working. working.

Exemplu la interogativ Have I been working? working?

Has he been working? working?

PAST PERFECT

already just never

HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE * * (infinitive + -ed) ed) or (3rd column of table of irregular verbs) verbs)

I had worked. worked. Id worked. worked.

I had not worked. worked. I hadn hadnt worked. worked.

Had I worked? worked?

He had worked. worked. He Hed worked. worked.

He dad not worked. worked. He hadn hadnt worked. worked.

Had he worked? worked?

TIMPUL PAST PERFECT CONTINUOUS

CUVINTE SPECIFICE how long since for

UTILIZARE -how long something had been happening before something else happened

FORMULA HAD + BEEN + INFINITIVE + ING

Exemplu la afirmativ I had been working. working. Id been working. working. He had been working. working. He Hed been working I shall work. work. Ill work. work.

Exemplu la negativ I had not been working. working. I hadn hadnt been working. working. He had not been working. working. He hadn hadnt been working. working. I shall not work. work.

Exemplu la interogativ Had I been working? working?

Had he been working? working?

FUTURE TENSE SIMPLE

next week tomorrow

-predictions about the future (you think that sth. sth. will happen) happen) -you decide to do sth. sth. spontaneously at the time of speaking, speaking, you haven't made a decision before main clause in type I of the if clauses

WILL/SHAL L+ INFINITIVE

Shall I work? work?

He will work. work. He ll work. He work.

He will not work. work. He won t work. won work.

Will he work? work?

TIMPUL GOING TO

CUVINTE SPECIFICE

UTILIZARE -when you have already decided to do sth. sth. in the future -what you think what will happen

FORMULA BE (AM, ARE, IS) + GOING TO + INFINITIVE

Exemplu la afirmativ I am going to work. work. Im going to work. work. He is going to work. work. He Hes going to work. work.

Exemplu la negativ I am not going to work. work. Im not going to work. work. He is not going to work. work. He Hes not going to work. work. I shall not be working. working.

Exemplu la interogativ Am I going to work? work?

Is he going to work? work?

FUTURE CONTINUOUS

An action will be in progress at a certain time in the future. future. This action has begun before the certain time. time. -Something happens because it normally happens. happens.

WILL/SHAL L + BE + INFINITVE + ing

I shall be working. working. Ill be working. working. He will be working. working. He Hell be working. working.

Shall I be working? working?

He will not be working. working. He won wont be working. working.

Will he be working? working?

TIMPUL FUTURE PERFECT SIMPLE

CUVINTE SPECIFICE

UTILIZARE -sth. sth. will already have happened before a certain time in the future

FORMULA WILL/SHAL L + HAVE + PAST PARTICIPLE * * (infinitive + -ed) ed) or (3rd column of table of irregular verbs) verbs) WILL/SHAL L + HAVE + BEEN + INFINITIVE + ING

Exemplu la afirmativ I shall have worked. worked. Ill have worked. worked. He will have worked. worked. He Hell have worked. worked.

Exemplu la negativ I shall have not worked. worked.

Exemplu la interogativ Shall I have worked? worked?

He will not have worked. worked. He won wont have worked. worked.

Will he have worked? worked?

FUTURE PERFECT CONTINUOUS

-sth. sth. will already have happened before a certain time in the future -emphasis: emphasis: length of time of an action

I shall have been working. working. Ill have been working. working. He will have been working. working. He Hell have been working. working.

I shall not have been working. working.

Shall I have been working? working?

He will not have been working. working. He won wont have been working. working.

Will he have been working? working?

TIMPUL CONDITIONA L SIMPLE

CUVINTE SPECIFICE

UTILIZARE -sth. sth. that might happen -main clause in type II of the if clauses

FORMULA WOULD + INFINITIVE

Exemplu la afirmativ I would work. work. . He would work. work.

Exemplu la negativ I would not work. work. I wouldn wouldnt work. work. He would not work. work. He wouldn wouldnt work. work. I would not be working. working. I wouldn wouldnt be working. working. He would not be working. working. He wouldn wouldnt be working

Exemplu la interogativ Would I work? work?

Would he work? work?

CONDITIONA L CONTINUOUS

-sth. sth. that might happen emphasis: emphasis: length of time of an action

WOULD + BE + INFINITIVE + ING

I would be working. working.

Would I be working? working?

He would be working. working.

Would he be working? working?

10

TIMPUL CONDITIONA L PERFECT

CUVINTE SPECIFICE

UTILIZARE -sth. sth. that might have happened in the past (It's too late now.) now.) -main clause in type III of the if clauses

FORMULA WOULD + HAVE + PAST PARTICIPLE * *(infinitive + -ed) ed) or (3rd column of table of irregular verbs) verbs) WOULD + HAVE + BEEN + INFINITIVE + ING

Exemplu la afirmativ I would have worked. worked.

Exemplu la negativ I would not have worked. worked. I wouldn wouldnt have worked. worked. He would not have worked. worked. He wouldn wouldnt have worked. worked. I would not have been working. working. I wouldn wouldnt have been working. working. He would not have been working. working. He wouldn wouldnt have been working. working.

Exemplu la interogativ Would I have worked? worked?

He would have worked

Would I have worked? worked?

CONDITIONA L PERFECT CONTINUOUS

-sth. sth. that might have happened in the past (It's too late now.) now.) emphasis: emphasis: length of time of an action

I would have been working. working.

Would I have been working? working?

He would have been working. working.

Would he have been working? working?

11

THE KEY OF SUCCESS IN SPEAKING

The Simple Aspect Past Perfect
HAD + VB III

Past Time
VB II

Present Perfect
HAVE/HAS + VB III

Present Tense
VB I (III sg -s, es) es)

Future Perfect
SHALL/WILL + HAVE + VB III

Future Tense
SHALL/WILL + VB I

The Continuous Aspect

HAD + BEEN + VB I + ING WAS/WERE + VB I + ING HAVE/HAAS + BEEN + VB I + ING AM/ARE/IS + VB I + ING SHALL/WILL + HAVE + BEEN + VB I +ING SHALL/WILL + BE + VB I + ING

The Passive Voice Simple Aspect

HAD + BEEN + VB III WAS/WERE + VB III HAVE/HAS + BEEN + VB III AM/ARE/IS + VB III SHALL/WILL + HAVE + BEEN + VB III SHALL/WILL + BE +VB III

The Passive Voice Continuous Aspect HAD + BEEN + BEING + VB III WAS/WERE + BEING + VB III HAVE/HAS + BEEN + BEING + VB III AM/ARE/IS + BEING + VB III SHALL/WILL SHALL/WILL + HAVE + + BE + BEING BEEN + + VB III BEING + VB III
12

Infinitive

Past Was / were

Past Participle Been Begun Broken Brought Bought Chosen Come Cost Cut Done

Romanian Translation A fi A ncepe A rupe, rupe, a sparge A aduce A cumpra A alege A veni A costa A tia A face 13

To Be Began To Begin Broke To Break Brought To Bring Bought To Buy Chose To Choose Came To Come Cost To Cost Cut To Cut Did To Do

Drew To Draw Drank To Drink Drove To Drive Ate To Eat Fell To Fall Fed To Feed Felt To Feel Found To Find Flew To Fly Forgot To Forget

Drawn

A desena

Drunk

A bea

Driven

A conduce

Eaten

A mnca

Fallen

A cdea

Fed

A hrni

Felt

A sim simi

Found

A gsi

Flown

A zbura

Forgotten

A uita 14

Got To Get Gave To Give had To Have Heard To Hear Hit To Hit Hurt To Hurt Kept To Keep Knew To Know Left To Leave Lit To Light

Got, gotten (AE)

A lua

Given

A da

Had

A avea

Heard

A auzi

Hit

A lovi

Hurt

A rni

Kept

A ine, ine, a pstra

Known

A tii

Left

A lsa, lsa, a prsi

Lit

A aprinde 15

Lost To Lose Made To Make Meant To Mean Met To Meet Overtook To Overtake Paid To Pay Put To Put Read To Read Rode To Ride Ran To Run

Lost Made Meant Met Overtaken Paid Put Read Ridden Run

A pierde A face A nsemna A ntlni A dep depi A plti A pune A citi A clri A fugi 16

Said To Say Saw To See Sent To Send Shook To Shake Sang To Sing Sank To Sink Sat To sit Slept To Sleep Spoke To Speak Stood To Stand

Said Seen Sent Shaken Sung Sunk Sat Slept Spoken stood

A spune A vedea A trimite A scutura, scutura, A cnta A se scufunda A sta jos A dormi A vorbi A sta n picioare 17

Stuck To Stick Swam To Swim Took To Take Taught To Teach Told To Tell Thought To Think Understood To Understand Woke up To Wake up Wore To Wear Won To Win Wrote To Write

Stuck Swum Taken Taught Told Thought Understood Woken up Worn Won Written

A (se) lipi A nota A lua A nv nva pe cineva A spune A gndi A nelege A se trezi A purta A c ctiga A scrie 18

Numbers
0-9 0 zero 1 one 2 two 3 three 4 four 5 five 6 six 7 seven 8 eight 9 - nine 1111-19 11 eleven 12 twelve 13 thirteen 14 - fourteen 15 fifteen 16 sixteen 17 - seventeen 18 eighteen 19 nineteen 10, 20, ...., 90 10 ten 20 twenty 30 thirty 40 - forty 50 fifty 60 sixty 70 seventy 80 eighty 90 - ninety 2121-29, ..., 9191-99 21 twenty one 22 twenty two 23 twenty - three 24 twenty - four 25 twenty - five 26 twenty - six 27 twenty - seven 28 twenty - eight 29 twenty - nine

19

100 one hundred / a hundred 101 one hundred and one 325 three hundred and twenty five 1000 one thousand / a thousand 1 504 one thousand five hundred and four 1 000 000 one million / a million

20

THE NOUN
Substantivul este partea de vorbire care denumete fiine, plante, lucruri, noiuni. n limba englez, la fel ca n limba romn, exist substantive proprii si substantive comune. In limba englez exist 4 genuri, spre deosebire de limba romn unde exist doar trei genuri. Exist genul masculin (denumete fiine de sex brbtesc), genul feminin (denumete fiine de sex feminin), genul neutru (denumete obiecte ale caror gen nu ne intereseaz) i genul comun (denumete substantive cu o singur form pentru ambele sexe).
Masculin Policeman Barman Businessman Buck Bull Rooster Grandson Boyfriend Groom HeHe-bear Feminin Policewoman Barmaid Businesswoman Doe Cow Hen Granddaughter Girlfriend Bride SheShe-bear Comun Police officer Bar attendant Businessperson Deer Ox Fowl Grandchild Friend Spouse Bear

21

Pluralul substantivului se marcheaz adugnd terminaia s. DAR substativele terminate n s, -z, -sh, -ch i x primesc terminaia es (busbuses, fox-foxes, match-matches, etc). Dac terminaia ch se pronun (k) atunci se adaug doar terminaia s. Dac y final este precedat de o consoan atunci se transform n ie i se adaug s (baby-babies). Exist cteva substantive la care pluralul difer, nu merge dup nici o regul (man-men, woman-women, foot-feet, tooth-teeth, child-children, mouse-mice, sheep-sheep, game-game, goose-geese, ox-oxen, louselice, deer-deer, etc). a cake of soap=o bucat de spun a drop of oil=o pictur de ulei a sheet of paper=o foaie de hrtie an item of news=o tire a glass/a bottle of water=u pahar/o sticl cu ap a spoonful of sugar=o lingur de zahr
22

100 one hundred / a hundred 101 one hundred and one 325 three hundred and twenty five 1000 one thousand / a thousand 1 504 one thousand five hundred and four 1 000 000 one million / a million

23

THE ADJECTIVE
FEL ADJECT IVE REGUL ATE ADJECTIVE SCURTE new cold low strange dark big thin newer colder lower stranger darker bigger thinner more ADJECTIVE LUNGI beautiful patient incredible real LUNGI clever good, good, well bad, bad, ill more beautiful more patient more incredible more real cleverer better worse POZITIV COMPARATI V -er SUPERLATIV -est / -iest the newest the coldest the lowest the strangest the darkest the biggest the thinnest the most the most beautiful the most patient the most incredible the most real the cleverest the best the worst

24

THE PRONOUN
Singular I -= eu You = tu He = el She = ea It = el/ea lucrul Plural We = noi You = voi They = ei They = ele They = ele lucrurile

25

Pronumele nehotrt
Each, every = fiecare Each other = unul pe / spre ctre altul Everybody = toi, toat lumea Everything = tot, totul Everyone = toi, fiecare All = tot, toat, toi , toate, totul One =un, unul , una, cineva, Another = un altul, o alta, nc unul, nc o One another = unul, una pe celalalt / cealalt Other = alt, alt, ali., alte The other =cellalt, cealalt, ceilali, celelalte Others =alii, altele The others =ceilali, celelalte Both =amndoi, amndou Either =oricare dintre doi sau dou

26

Neither =nici unu, una dintre doi sau dou Several =civa, cteva Much =mult, mult Many = muli, multe Little = puin, puin Few =puini, puine Some = ceva, nite, unii, unele, cteva Somebody = cineva Someone = careva, cineva Something = ceva Any =oricare, orice, ceva, nite, vreun, vreo Anybody =cineva, orice, nimeni Anyone = careva, oricare, nimeni Anything = ceva, orice, nimic Nobody = nimeni No one = nici unul, nici o Nothing =nimic

27

PRACTICE MAKES THE DIFFERENCE

28

REPHRASING
I. Complete the second sentence so that it has a similar meaning to the first sentence.

1. The Newmans lawyer won the first lawsuit on the second of October last year. The .... . 2. Youd better forget about going by yourself in that neighbourhood. You .... . 3. Shall we all go for a walk after this trial is over? Why........ . How ... . 4. I had to go to work although I wasn't feeling well. I had to go ..... . I had to go ..... . 5. They say that the Asian criminals are not as dangerous as other criminals from around the world. It is ..... . The Asian ...
29

6. Jasons lawsuit wasnt as long as Brians. Brian . 7. He won the trial due to his hard work. Because . 8. They had some problems while debating, so in the end they did not pass the law. If . 9. As a consequence of his fathers murder, he could not go to work anymore. Since .. . 10. Although she was a good lawyer, she lost the case. In spite .. . 11. She missed the buss so she had to take a taxi in order to get to the police. If . . 12. I enjoy going to the beach. My husband does not. Even ... .

30

MULTIPLE CHOICE EXERCISE

I. For questions 1-9 read the text and decide which answer (A, B, C or D) best fits each gap. There is an example at the beginning (0). Example: (0) legally

31

In order to (0) bring a person wanted for criminal activity who is found in a different state there must be (1) .between the two states. There is a legal process for this to happen and it is referred to as extradition. Extradition is the (2) process by which a state asks for and acquires from another state the custody of a suspected or convicted criminal. The manner in which extradition takes place among the states is governed by the United States Constitution, Federal statute and state law. Each state of the United States is considered to be (3) .. over its territory and when the Constitution was written there was concern about criminals being able to safely flee from one state to another to avoid prosecution. In response to this concern, Article IV, Section II, Clause 2 was included. This is known as the Extradition Clause and reads as follows: A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other (4) .. , who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime. The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the Extradition Clause applies to felonies, (5) and even to petty offences. It has further held that in the event a state chooses not to surrender a wanted individual, a federal court may order such surrender to the demanding state. In order to legally bring a person wanted for criminal activity who is found in a different state there must be cooperation (6) the two states. There is a legal process for this to happen and it is referred to as extradition. Extradition is the official process by which a state asks for and acquires from another state the custody of a suspected or convicted criminal. The manner in which extradition takes place among the states is governed by the United States Constitution, Federal statute and state law. Each state of the United States is considered to be sovereign over its territory and when the Constitution was written there was concern about criminals being able to safely (7) from one state to another to avoid prosecution. In response to this concern, Article IV, Section II, Clause 2 was included. This is known as the Extradition Clause and reads as follows: A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the (8) .. Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime. The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the Extradition Clause applies to felonies, misdemeanours and even to (9) . offences. It has further held that in the event a state chooses not to surrender a wanted individual, a federal court may order such surrender to the demanding state. Interstate Extradition in the United States by David J. Shestokas, 8 April 2009 0. A legally B. justly C. lawfully D. rightfully 1. A aid B. assistance C. cooperation D. harmony 2. A legitimate B. official C. conclusive D. licensed 3. A imperial B. dominant C. sovereign D. royal 4. A Crime B. atrocity C. corruption D. murder 5. A fault B. slip-up C. violation D. misdemeanours 6. A through B. between C. among D. into 7. A runaway B. escape C. flee D. vanish 32 8. A administrative B. controlling C. commander D. executive 9. A petty B. inessential C. niggling D. picayune

READING AND COMPREHENSION

You are going to read a newspaper article. Choose the answer (A, B, C, or D) which you think fits best according to the text.

33

Former Illinois police sergeant Drew Peterson has been married four times. Wife three, Kathleen Savio, died under mysterious circumstances in February 2004 just weeks before her divorce settlement with Peterson was to become final. Her dead body was found lying face down in an empty bathtub. Her hair was soaked in blood from a head wound. A Coroners Jury ruled her death an accident. But Savios family members from the beginning believed that Peterson was responsible for her death. It had been an abusive, violent marriage from the beginning. Who was responsible for the spousal abuse in the marriage is still a subject of considerable debate. Kathleen tried to have a domestic violence complaint filed against Peterson but he was never charged. Kathleen, however, was charged twice in 2002 with battery and domestic battery, although she was acquitted each time. Kathleen reportedly told her family members that if something happened to her, Peterson would be responsible.
34

But despite the unusual circumstances surrounding Kathleens death, there was never any serious law enforcement effort to charge Peterson with any kind of crime associated with her death. Then in 2007 Petersons fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared under peculiar circumstances. Stacys disappearance immediately drew virtual non-stop cable news channel coverage. Nancy Grace could barely contain herself. She rode that news pony to death until the Caley Anthony case broke in 2008 giving her another media pony to ride into the ground. Stacy Petersons disappearance also gave the Savio family an opportunity to resurrect her death from the grave. They pressed for an exhumation and a new autopsy. There were so many sound bites and news spins that the 24hour cable news cycle could barely keep abreast of the dizzying pace of the coverage. There were times when the Peterson case forced a historical presidential campaign to take a backseat to breaking news about some new detail discovered in the case. Chris Matthews was not the only cable chatterer who felt a tingle running up his leg.
35

The daunting media coverage in the Peterson case was not lost on Illinois politicians, particularly Will County states attorney James Glasgow. Within weeks of Stacys disappearance, Glasgow joined the Illinois State Police by naming Peterson a suspect in what they believed was a homicide instead of a disappearance. The Savio family capitalized on this media-driven turn of events to secure the exhumation of Kathleens body for a criminal autopsy. The results of that autopsy, photographs of the crime scene, and police reports convinced Glasgow that Kathleen Savio had been murdered. But the county prosecutor had a problem. The physical evidence supporting the homicide theory was not conclusive; and all the statements by members of the Savio family based on what Kathleen reportedly told them and Kathleens own requests for protective orders would be inadmissible in a court of law under traditional hearsay rules of evidence. But State Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi, D-Joliet, found a way around the hearsay rules of evidence by introducing a bill that would allow a judge to admit hearsay evidence in a first-degree murder case if prosecutors could prove the defendant killed the witness to keep him/her from testifying. The bill was enacted into law, even as Wilhelmi and others tried to say the law was not in response to the Drew Peterson case. Some Republican lawmakers disputed that claim.
36

Glasgow finally had what he needed to secure a first degree murder indictment against Peterson in connection with Kathleen Savios death. Peterson was indicted on May 7, 2009 in a two-count first degree murder indictment, charging that he killed his former wife by forcing her to inhale fluid. Glasgow immediately rushed before the news cameras, announcing: In essence, what youre basically allowing the victim of a violent crime to do is testify from the grave. One of Petersons attorneys, Joel Brodsky, was not impressed with this new legal reasoning. He said the law had been passed specifically to put his client behind bars based on nothing more than rumor and innuendo and that the law denied a defendant of his constitutional right to confront his accusers. Theyre changing the law, changing the rules, changing forensic findings to get [Peterson], Brodsky told the media. The law [is] not supposed to be made for a particular case. [] Swayed by the media fanaticism led by the likes of Nancy Grace and non-stop Just In or breaking news coverage on the cable news channels, the Illinois Legislature passed a Drew Peterson Law designed to usurp him of the essential constitutional right of confrontation because of the popular public belief that he is obviously guilty. The Illinois Legislature does not have the legal authority to undermine Drew Petersons established and clearly recognized right of confrontation guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. As with most Americans, we do not know if Drew Peterson is in fact guilty of killing his third wife Kathleen or whether he was criminally responsible for the disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy. What we do know, and what we will never relinquish to media hysteria, is our belief that Drew Peterson, like every individual accused of a crime, enjoys a constitutionally-protected presumption of innocence which Illinois legislators and state prosecutors are attempting to deny him. What we believe, and truly hope, is that the Illinois Legislature has set up a constitutional confrontation that will end with the U.S. Supreme Court striking down the Drew Peterson Law just as it struck down Dwayne Giles California murder conviction. Legislators and State Prosecutors Attempting to Deny Confrontation, Clause Guarantees, Presumption of Innocence A Drew Peterson Defense, John Floyd and Billy Sinclair, Provided by John T. Floyd Law Firm By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair, Copyright Clearance 14 August 2009 37

1. The text suggests that: A. Kathleen Savio died before the divorce B. Drew Peterson killed his wife C. Kathleen Savio was the sergeants second wife D. Kathleen Savio was still alive when the police found her body in an empty bathtube. 2. According to the writer: A. Peterson was charged with domestic violence B. Kathleen was charged with domestic violence C. Kathleens family knew Peterson would kill her D. The subject of spousal abuse was very much debated in the media. 3. Which of the following views does the writer express? A. Nancy Grace was Petersons third wife B. The Savio family exhumated Stacxys body C. The case of Stacy Peterson took a backseat to breaking news D. The Glasgow police decided Kathleen Savio had bee murdered by Chris Matthews 4. According to the text: A. Due to Senator A. J. Wilhelmi, the judge admitted the hearsay evidence in a first-degree murder case. B. The physical evidence supportingthe homicide theory was admitted in a court of law under traditional hearsay rules of evidence. C. Peterson was not charged with a first degree murder D. Joel Brodsky, the attorney, claimed it had been a fair trial, despite the rumors and innuendos. 5. In the last paragraph we learn that: A. Prosecutors in the Peterson case faound it very easy to prove that Peterson murdered Kathleen Savio to keep her from testifying against her. B. Kathleen Savio had requested a protective order. C. The Glasgow legislature passed a Drew Peterson Law designed to usurp him of the essential constitutional 38 right of confrontation. D. Most Americans do not believe that Peterson is in fact guilty of killing his third wife.

WRITING

I. You have just finished Law School and you are asked by the Dean of the Faculty to write an article in the local newspaper in which you should promote the Law School. In the same article you should also underline the importance and the responsibility this school involves. Write your article in approximately 250 words.

39

Crime categories
A crime is an illegal act which may result in prosecution and punishment by the state if the accused (= the person or people charged with a crime) is / are convicted (= found guilty in a court of law). Generally, in order to be convicted of a crime, the accused must be shown to have committed an illegal (= unlawful) act with a criminal state of mind. Look at the list of crimes in the box, then look at the categories below. Decide which category each one comes under, and write the crime in the appropriate space in the table. Some crimes can be listed under more than one category. One of the words / expressions in the list is not a crime.

40

1. abduction 2. actual bodily harm 3. aiding and abetting (= assisting) an offender 4. arson 5. assault 6. battery 7. being equipped to steal 8. bigamy 9. blackmail 10. breach of the Official Secrets Act 11. breaking and entering 12. bribery 13. burglary 13. careless or reckless driving 14. committing a breach of the peace 15. conspiracy 16. contempt of court 17. criminal damage (vandalism, and sometimes also hooliganism) 18. deception or fraud in order to obtain property, services or pecuniary advantage 19. driving without a licence or insurance 20. drug dealing 21. drunk in charge / drink driving 22. embezzlement 23. espionage 24. forgery 25. grievous bodily harm 26. handling stolen goods 27. indecency 28. indecent assault 29. infanticide 30. manslaughter 31. misuse of drugs 32. money laundering 33. murder 34. obscenity 35. obstruction of the police 36. paedophilia 37. perjury 38. perverting the course of justice 39. piracy 40. possessing something with intent to damage or destroy property 41. possessing weapons 42. racial abuse 43. rape 44. robbery 45. sedition 46. suicide 47. terrorism 48. theft 49. treason 50. unlawful assembly 51. wounding

41

Crimes against the person

Public order offences Road traffic offences

Crimes against property

Sexual offences

Political offences

Offences against justice

42

Name the offence

Look at these situations, then decide which crime has been, or is being, committed in each case.
1. TV Newsreader: Police believe the fire was started deliberately at around 2 o'clock this morning when burning paper was pushed through the letterbox. They are appealing for witnesses to the event. 2. Crown Prosecutor: Tell us in your own words exactly what happened. Witness: We were in the bar when a man walked up to the victim, pointed a gun at his head and said 'You're a dead man.' Then he pulled the trigger three times

43

3.Police constable: You were going in excess of 60, and this is a 30 zone. Man in car: I think you're mistaken, constable. I was well within the speed limit. 4. Woman: When I got home, I discovered that my back door had been broken open. Police officer: Had anything been stolen? Woman: Yes, my new laptop, 200 in cash and my pet parrot. 5. Police officer: I'm sorry sir, but I have to report your actions to the proper authorities. Man: Look, officer, here's 50. Let's just pretend this didn't happen, eh? 6. Interviewing detective: All right, Dagsy. We know you didn't do the Cornmarket Street bank job yourself, but we know that you were involved somehow.Police suspect: I was just driving the car Mr Regan, honest. And I didn't know what the others were up to until they came back with bags of cash.
44

Criminal procedure
When the accused knows that he is going to stand trial, he asks a solicitor to prepare his case. In a criminal case, the police will have their own barrister, who is known as the Crown Prosecutor. Members of the jury, when required, are selected and briefed on their duties. A date for the trial is arranged. The information collected is then given to a barrister who will defend him in court. Before the trial begins, the counsels review their evidence and decide how to present their case. At the beginning of the trial, the judge asks the defendant how he pleads: 'guilty' or 'not guilty'

These two barristers are referred to throughout the trial as counsel for the defence and counsel for the prosecution.
45

Both counsels then address the jury with a summary of what they believe is true, and explain what the jury will hear at the trial.

At the end of the trial, the counsels summarise the facts as they see them, and the jury then retires to deliberate in private.

The counsel for the prosecution then calls and questions witnesses. The counsel for the defence can cross-examine these people. The defendant will also be questioned by both counsels. If the defendant is found to be 'not guilty', he is acquitted. When the jury has reached its verdict, it returns to the court and the foreman of the jury delivers the verdict to the court.

However, if the jury's verdict is 'guilty', the defendant is convicted and sentenced by the judge.

46

The defendant may have to serve a custodial sentence (in other words go to prison), he may be given a suspended sentence, or he may be fined (or a combination of two of these).

If the defendant is not happy with the decision of the court, he is free to appeal to a higher court. The highest courts for appellants in England and Wales are the House of Lords and the Court of Justice of the European Communities (also called the European Court of Justice, or ECJ for short).

47

Latin words and expressions are still relatively common in the legal profession. How many of the meanings on the left can you match with the expressions on the right?
1. By the operation of the law. 2. Caught in the act of committing a crime. 3. On the face of it, or as things seem at first. 4. A gift (usually money) with no obligations attached. 5. Starting again. 6. On its own, or all alone. 7. The right to be heard in a court. 8. Among / In addition to other things. 9. A legal action or application pursued by one party only. 10. After the event. 11. Equally, or with no distinction. 12. An act, such as murder, which is a crime in itself. 13. When a threat is implied in a contract, and as a result the contract is invalid. 14. A legal remedy against wrongful imprisonment. 15. Taken as a matter of fact, even though the legal status may not be certain. 16. For a short time. 17. Legal action against a person (for example, one party in a case claims that the other should do some act or pay damages). 18. By this fact, or the fact itself shows this to be true. 19. Acting in place of a parent. 20. A matter on which a judgement has been given.

ab initio

bona fide(s)

actus reus ad litem

bona vacantia

consensus ad idem

corpus delicti de jure de facto de novo doli capax

doli incapax

ex post facto

ex parte

ex gratia

48

21. A decision correctly made by a court, which can be used as a precedent. 22. Capable of committing a crime. 23. The duty to prove that what has been alleged in court is true. 24. In total good faith, a state which should exist between parties to some types of legal relationship. 25. A real agreement to a contract by both parties. 26. A situation where the legal title is clear. 27. Referring to the case at law. 28. Mad, or not completely sane. 29. With no owner, or no obvious owner. 30. The mental state required to be guilty of committing a crime. 31. An action done in return for something done or promised. 32. From the beginning. 33. Legal action against a thing (for example, one party claims property or goods in the possession of another). 34. An act forbidden by criminal law. 35. Not capable of committing a crime. 36. The real proof that a crime has been committed. 37. An act which is not a crime, but is forbidden. 38. In good faith. 39. Acting in a way which exceeds your legal powers.

mala in se

in flagrante delicto

habeas corp non compos mentis us

in personam in loco pare ntis mala prohi bita inter al ia cur ia m per se ipso fa ct o quid pro quo

in r e m locus sta ndi ipso ju re

in terrorem

mens re a pari pa ss u pro tem por e uberrima e fidei

per onus prob andi

prima fac ie ultra vir es 49

res jud ica ta

For the exam:

From the book GOLEGAL 1. Exercise 1 page 4 2. Exercise 2 page 5 3. Exercise 4 pag 6 4. Exercise 1 page 19 5. Exercise 1 page 24 6. Exercise 1page 31 7. Exercise 2 page 34 8. Exercise 3 page 37 9. Exercise 1, 2, 3 page 68

50

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION

51