Question 2. Under what circumstances is it permissible to ask a leading question? Question 4. Is a contested confession allegedly made to police admissible in a criminal prosecution? Question 5. Compare and contrast the standards of proof. Question 6. Under what circumstances can a witness use a document to refresh their memory in court?

LONG ANSWER QUESTIONS Question 7. Mary Jane was the partner in a major law firm in BigCity. Last year she resigned following a dispute with other partners in the firm. At a board meeting Jane made certainallegations of bullying and sexual harassment by partners in the firm. Following herresignation, Jane brought proceedings in the Federal Court for breach of contract,negligence, and breach of statutory duty. The matter failed to resolve at mediation, andthe case went to trial. Evidence that was presented to the court included testimony thatJane had been "groped" and "felt up" by one of the managing partners in the firm, whichwas denied by the person concerned during cross-examination.At the conclusion of the trial, the Judge has asked for your views on thestandard of proof required in this case. Give reasons. 8 Marks

Question 8. Marwad Selim is facing trial in the District/County court on a count of inflicting seriousinjury in circumstances of aggravation. The Crown case is that Selim is a 30-year-old man from Kuwait. He was employed as a civil engineer for some months while a visaapplication was being processed. That visa was ultimately rejected, as he was identifiedas having prior convictions for fraud. He was later arrested and placed in a detentioncentre pending deportation.

While at the BigCity Detention Centre, Marwad became involved in a riot over the cramped living conditions. The Crown alleged that during the riot a building was setalight, and that several security guards were seriously injured. One of the security guardwas struck in the head by a brick that had been removed from a wall after a group ofinmates barricaded themselves into a top floor room of the Centre.

These events were filmed by security officers. When the riot was subsequently contained, Marwad was later identified as the individual who threw the brick by a taskforce of officers who reviewed the footage. The Crown prosecutor has led evidenceof the footage at the trial, supported by testimony of two security guards who have givenevidence that they recognised Marwad because they had worked for some weeks inthat area of the Centre where Marwad was housed. The footage, which has beenshown to the jury, is reasonably good quality, but the pixilation around the edges isunclear at times.

Discuss the admissibility of this evidence. 10 Marks

Question 9. An appeal is being heard in the Supreme Court, following the conviction of KonradKerrigan for contract killing of a business associate. The Crown case was that Konradhad arranged for a known contract killer, John Wick, to kill Barry Jones with a pencil.He provided $10,000 cash, and a sharpened HB pencil as part of the arrangement.John Wick was later apprehended at the scene of the crime. Wick was given immunity from prosecution on the condition that he gave evidence against Konrad. Konrad waslater charged. Konrad did not give evidence at his trial and did not answer questionsput to him by investigating police.

During the summing up of the case, the trial judge made comments to this effect: (i) theaccused was entitled to give evidence at his trial, but under no obligation to do so;

(ii) the prosecution has the burden in all cases to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; (iii) that just because the accused did not give evidence "must not be thought by yoube an admission of guilt". However, the Judge then said: "when you are thinking about the Crown case, you may take into account the fact thatthe accused neither denied, nor contradicted the evidence given to the court. And, inthis case, these were matters that, if true, would be within his knowledge and for whichonly he was in a position to give evidence of. And this is because as a matter of logicand common sense, if two people are the only parties able to give evidence, and whereone of them has not contradicted or challenged the evidence given by anotherimplicating them, that evidence is more likely to be believed."

Discuss the issue(s) on appeal. 10 Marks

Question 10. In the Supreme Court, two insurance companies are engaged in a complex disputeabout indemnity payments for workers' compensation payments made to MrsFrangipani over the course of fifteen years. At stake is an amount of money in excessof two million dollars, plus costs and interest. One of the companies, Hartless Inc., hasfiled a recovery claim against Mrs Frangipani alleging fraud, which, in turn, is beingsourced through another insurer.

The basis of the fraud allegation is that Mrs Frangipani was advised that certain rehabilitation payments was coming to an end, and that she would be required to returnto work. That same afternoon Mrs Frangipani was involved in a motor-vehicle accidentat traffic lights. A taxi driver apparently drove into the rear of her car, causing a whiplashinjury. She claims chronic pain ever since. Subsequent medical reports on theexistence of pain were inconclusive. A private investigator conducted a lengthyinvestigation, which included conversations with Mrs Frangipani's neighbour, MabelBrown.

Mabel Brown gave a statement to the investigator that (i) she had seen Mrs Frangipanimany times mowing her own lawn; (ii) she did not see any signs of pain in herbehaviour; and (iii) that Frangipani had told her over coffee one afternoon that she was"getting paid a lot of money to stay at home" and that "she caused the accident with thecab driver by breaking hard" and "it was easy to fool doctors".Counsel for Hartless called Mrs Brown as a witness. During evidence-in-chief, counselintroduced the events set out in the statement. Mrs Brown told the court that she didnot remember anything about the statement and denied the contents that were thenput to her by counsel.

What are the issues linked to this development in this case? 10 Marks