首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
How efficient is our system of criminal trial? Does it really do the basic job we ask of it — convicting the guilty and acquitti
How efficient is our system of criminal trial? Does it really do the basic job we ask of it — convicting the guilty and acquitti
admin
2010-07-06
18
问题
How efficient is our system of criminal trial? Does it really do the basic job we ask of it — convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent? It is often said that the British trial system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. The lawyers on each side are so engrossed in playing bard to win, Challenging each other and the judge on technical points, that the object of finding out the truth is almost forgotten. All the effort is concentrated on the big day, on the dramatic cross examination of the key Witnesses in front of the jury. Critics like to compare our "adversarial" system (resembling two adversaries engaged in a contest) with the continental "inquisitorial" system, under which the judge play a more important inquiring role.
In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were similar. At that time trial by "ordeal" — especially a religious event — was the main way of testing guilt or innocence. When this way eventually abandoned the two systems parted company. On the continent church-trained legal officials took over the function of both prosecuting and judging, while in England these were largely left to lay people, the Justice of the Peace and the jurymen who were illiterate and this meant that all the evidence had to be put to them orally. This historical accident dominates procedure even today, with all evidence being given in open court by word of mouth on the crucial day.
On the other hand, in France for instance, all the evidence is written before the trial under supervision by an investigating judge. This exhaustive pretrial looks very undramatic; much of its is just a public checking of the written records already gathered.
The Americans adopted the British system lock, stock and barrel and enshrined it in their constitution. But, while the basic features of our systems are common, there are now significant differences in the way serious cases are handled. First, because the USA has virtually no contempt of court laws to prevent pretrial publicity in the newspaper and on television, Americans lawyers are allowed to question jurors about knowledge and beliefs.
In Britain this is virtually never allowed, and a random selection of jurors who are presumed not to be prejudiced are empanelled. Secondly, there is no separate profession of barrister in the United States, and both prosecution and defense lawyers who are to present cases in court prepare themselves. They go out and visit the scene, track down and interview witnesses, and familiarize themselves personally with the background. In Britain it is the solicitor who prepares the case, and the barrister who appears in court is not even allowed to meet witnesses beforehand. British barristers also alternate doing both prosecution and defense work. Being kept distant from the preparation and regularly appearing for both sides, barristers are said to avoid becoming too personally involved, and can approach cases more dispassionately. American lawyers, however, often know their cases better.
Reformers rightly want to learn from other countries’ mistakes and successes. But what is clear is that justice systems, largely because they are the result of long historical growth, are peculiarly difficult to adapt piecemeal.
Which of the following sentences is NOT true?
选项
A、Oral evidence was unnecessary in France because the judges and prosecutors could read.
B、When trial by ordeal was finally abandoned throughout Europe, trial by jury was introduced tn Britain.
C、In the adversarial system. it is the lawyers who play the leading roles.
D、Lawyers in Britain are prepared to lie in order to win their cases.
答案
D
解析
细节题。本题为细节比对题。A 与第三段说明的法国审判系统中证据使用书面形式的内容相符;B 与第二段第三、四句的意思一致C 与第一段最后一句中对两种审判形式的对比相符,只有D 曲解了第一段中对于英国律师的描述。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/9yisFFFM
本试题收录于:
公共英语四级笔试题库公共英语(PETS)分类
0
公共英语四级笔试
公共英语(PETS)
相关试题推荐
Supermarketshoppershaveneverbeenmorespoiltforchoice.Butjustwhenwethoughttraditionalsystemsofselectivefarmingh
Wherecantheexpression"lameduck"beheard?
Wherecantheexpression"lameduck"beheard?
A=BOOK1B=BOOK2C=BOOK3D=BOOK4Whichbook(s)say(s)that...theclimateaffectsthefuturesustainableagricultural
Youhavereadanarticleinamagazinewhichstates,"Withtheever-increasinghousepricesinbigmetropolises,itisbetterf
WhendidMr.Schallerbecomeinterestedinanimals?
Wherecantheexpression"lameduck"beheard?
Wherecantheexpression"lameduck"beheard?
Thepaintingwasprobablystolen______.Itwas______thatPerrugiawasarrested.
随机试题
某金矿始建于1992年1月,是村镇企业,2005年乡镇金矿归口管理,县黄金公司承包经营。黄金公司调配干部和技术人员12人,健全管理机构,设立10个科室,4个车间,1个车队。该金矿地处山区,矿区分散。在承包归口管理之前,日采选能力只有100t。归口管理后
在Execl2010中,公式=A$1+B3中,A$1是绝对引用,而B3是相对引用。
无兴奋期的全麻药物是
调制解调器(Modem)的作用是()。
有关X线对比度的叙述。错误的是
黄河股份有限公司系上市公司(以下简称黄河公司)为增值税一般纳税人,适用的增值税税率为17%,所得税税率为25%,所得税采用资产负债表债务法核算;除特别说明外,不考虑除增值税、所得税以外的其他相关税费;所售资产均未计提减值准备。销售商品均为正常的生产经营活动
(2013年)2006年6月,梁某因交通肇事罪被判入狱服刑4年。2011年11月,因虚开普通发票罹被判处有期徒刑4年。下列有关梁某的刑罚适用及执行的说法中,正确的有()。
出版公司发出订立印刷合同的要约,要求印刷厂在一周内答复。印刷厂如期作出承诺,但因邮政部门的原因,承诺在超过承诺期限一周后才到达出版公司。印刷厂的承诺在()情况下有效。
张某下午六时多外出买菜,出门时看手表,发现表的时针和分针的夹角为110°,七时前回家时又看手表,发现时针和分针的夹角仍是110°。那么张某外出买菜用了多少分钟?
设在SQLServer2008某数据库中有商品表和销售表,两个表的定义如下:CREATETABLE商品表(商品号char(10)PRIMARYKEY,商品名varehar(40),类别varchar(20),进货单价i
最新回复
(
0
)