Тема 15.3. Сбор свидетельских показаний. Дознание.

Грамматическая тема: Условные предложения ΙΙ типа.

Study the words and the word-combinations

Evidence – доказательство, улика;

investigating agency - следственный орган;

admissible evidence - показание, допустимое в качестве доказательства в суде;

convince - убедить;

potentially - потенциально;

subject - подчиненный;

legislation - законодательство; закон;

premises - помещение, дом;

jurisdiction - судебная практика;

in this instance - в этом случае;

search warrant - ордер на обыск;

evidence on oath - показания под присягой;

outcome - результат;

seize - захватывать;

detain - задерживать;

production - предъявление;

exhibits - вещественные доказательства;

subsequent - последующий;

comply with - соответствовать;

procedure laid down - установленная процедура;

establish the guilt - доказать вину;

suppress evidence - утаить доказательство;

conviction - осуждение, приговор;

plainly - откровенно;

exclusionary rule - правило об исключении из доказательств;

identifying witness – понятой;

good reason - достаточное основание,

interrogation - допрос;

confession - признание;

admission of offence - признание в совершении преступления;

eventually - в конечном счете;

plea of guilty - заявление подсудимого о признании вины;

contested trial - состязательный процесс;

restrictions - ограничения;

coerce - принуждать;

in custody - содержащийся под стражей;

failure - неисполнение;

rejection – отказ;

involuntary statement – недобровольное заявление;

administer a caution - делать предостережение;

make a statement – сделать заявление;

discretion - усмотрение;

admit in evidence -допустить в качестве доказательства;

oppression - притеснение;

torture - пытка;

inhuman - бесчеловечный;

degrade - унижать;

treatment – обращение.

I. Scan through the text. Restore the word order in the questions that follow and answer them.

Gathering evidence

The identification of the suspect is not the final stage of the process: it is essential that the investigating agency gather sufficient legally admissible evidence to convince the judge or jury that the suspect is guilty. In order to secure the necessary evidence, the police employ a variety of powers and procedures; because these potentially involve interference with the freedom of the suspect, who must at this stage be treated as an innocent person, they are normally subject to close control either by legislation or by the courts. One important procedure is a search of the suspect or of premises or vehicles. Most jurisdictions allow a search to be carried out only if there is “reasonable ground for suspecting” that the evidence will be found. In some cases a person may be stopped on the street and searched. In this instance, the police officer is to identify himself and state the reasons for the search. A search of private premises usually requires a search warrant issued by a magistrate or judge. The law generally permits a search warrant to be issued only if the issuing authority is satisfied after hearing evidence on oath that there is good reason to suspect that the evidence will be found on the premises. The warrant may be subject to time limits and normally permits only one search to be carried out. In most countries the judge or magistrate who issues the warrant must be told of the outcome of the search. Material seized as a result of a search under the authority of a search warrant is usually detained by the police for production as exhibits at any subsequent trial. Evidence discovered as a result of any search that does not comply with the procedures laid down by the law is not admitted in the trial, even though it clearly establishes the guilt of the accused person, and even though the suppression of the evidence may prevent the conviction of a person who is plainly guilty. This rule, known as the exclusionary rule, is a matter of dispute in many English-speaking countries.

1) What the investigating agency do to convince the judge that the suspect is guilty should? 2) What to be is done in order to secure the necessary evidence? 3) What involve interference with the freedom of the might suspect? 4) What the police normally subject to are? 5) One is important procedure a search of the suspect, isn't it? 6) When most jurisdictions allow a search to be do carried out? 7) What be done in some cases might? 8) Should identify the police officer himself and state the reasons for the search? 9) What required is to carry out a search of private premises? 10) Who usually a search warrant issues? 11) When the law does generally permit a search warrant to be issued? 12) May the warrant subject to time limits be? 13) Who must of the outcome of the search be told? 14) What usually detained by the police for production as exhibits is at any trial? 15) What not admitted in the trial is? 16) What rule a matter of dispute in many jurisdictions is?

II. Agree or disagree with the following statements.

1) The police must gather evidence to convince the judge that the suspect is innocent. 2) Gathering evidence doesn’t involve interference with the freedom of the suspect. 3) The suspect must be treated as a guilty person at the stage of gathering evidence. 4) The police must not be subject to close control by legislation at the stage of gathering evidence. 5) Jurisdictions don’t allow a search to be carried if there is reasonable ground for suspecting that the evidence will not be found. 6) The police officer must not identify himself and state the reasons for the search. 7) A search of private premises usually requires identifying witnesses. 8) The law permits a search warrant to be issued only if there is good reason to suspect that the offender will be found on the premises. 9) The warrant normally permits only two searches to be carried out. 10) The judge who issues the warrant must not be told of the result of the search. 11) The police for production as exhibits at any subsequent trial usually detain material seized as a result of a search under the authority of a search warrant. 12) Evidence discovered as a result of legal search is not admitted in the trial. 13) Evidence that clearly establishes the guilt of the accused person but discovered as a result of illegal search is admitted in the trial. 14) The suppression of the evidence may prevent the conviction of a person who is plainly innocent.

III. Restore the word order in the following statements.

1) The investigating agency to gather sufficient legally admissible evidence to convince the judge or jury that the suspect is is guilty. 2) To secure involves the necessary evidence potentially interference with the freedom of the suspect. 3) The suspect treated as an innocent person at the stage of gathering evidence must be. 4) The police subject to close control either by legislation or by the courts at the stage of gathering evidence must be. 5) Jurisdictions a search to be carried out allow only if there is reasonable ground for suspecting that the evidence will be found. 6) A person stopped on the street and searched may be. 7) The police officer to identify himself and state the reasons for the search is. 8) A search of private premises usually a search warrant issued by a magistrate or judge requires. 9) The law generally a search warrant to be issued only if the issuing authority is satisfied after hearing evidence on oath that there is good reason to suspect that the evidence will be found on the premises permits. 10) The warrant subject to time limits may be. 11) The warrant normally only one search to be carried out permits. 12) The judge or magistrate who issues the warrant of the outcome of the search must be told. 13) Material seized as a result of a search under the authority of a search warrant usually detained by the police for production as exhibits at any subsequent trial is. 14) Evidence discovered as a result of illegal search in the trial is not admitted. 15) Evidence that clearly establishes the guilt of the accused person but discovered as a result of illegal search in the trial is not admitted. 16) The suppression of the evidence the conviction of a person who is plainly guilty may prevent.

IV. Translate the following words and phrases from Russian into English.

Спорный вопрос; улика; показание, допустимое в качестве доказательства в суде; убедить; выдать ордер; подчиненный; законодательство; судебная практика; ордер на обыск; показания под присягой; результат; захватывать; задерживать; предъявление; вещественные доказательства; последующий; соответствовать; установленная процедура; доказать вину; утаить доказательство; приговор; откровенно; правило об исключении из доказательств; следственный орган; незаконный обыск.

V. Complete the following statements.

1) The investigating agency is to gather … 2) To secure the necessary evidence potentially involves … 3) The suspect must be treated as … 4) The police must be subject to … 5) Jurisdictions allow a search to be … 6) A person may be stopped … 7) The police officer is to identify … 8) A search of private premises usually requires … 9) The law generally permits a search warrant to be … 10) The warrant may be subject to … 11) The warrant normally permits … 12) The judge or magistrate who issues … must be told of … 13) Material seized as … is usually detained by … 14) Evidence discovered as a result of … is not admitted in … 15) Evidence that clearly establishes … is not admitted in … 16) The suppression of the evidence may prevent …

VI. Choose one topic to speak about a) a search of the suspect; b) a search of private premises; c) legal and illegal search; d) exclusionary rule. Retell the text Gathering evidence.

Interrogation and confession.

I. Scan through the text. Restore the word order in the questions that follow and answer them.

The interrogation of suspected persons is an important aspect of the investigation of offenses. Usually the aim of the questioning is to obtain an admission of the offense that will lead eventually to a plea of guilty and avoid the need for a contested trial. All English-language countries place restrictions on the methods of interrogation in order to ensure that suspects are not coerced into confessions by unacceptable means. In the United States any suspect who is being interrogated in custody must be offered the services of a lawyer, at the expense of the state if he cannot afford to pay, and failure to advise the suspect of this right results in the rejection of a confession as evidence. English law follows the same general principle, that a person suspected or accused of a criminal offense is not at any stage in the process of investigation or trial obliged to answer any question or to give evidence. For many years the law relating to confessions in England consisted of a simple rule prohibiting the admission as evidence at trial of any involuntary statement made by an accused person. The investigating police officer is to administer to the suspect a caution that he was not obliged to answer any question and that anything he did say might be given in evidence at his trial. This caution was required to be given at the beginning of any period of interrogation and immediately before the suspect began to make a statement or confession. Failure to give the caution at the right time or in the right form did not necessarily mean that the statement would be excluded from evidence, but it did give the trial judge the discretion to exclude the evidence if he considered it just to do so. A confession by an accused person may be admitted in evidence provided that the court is satisfied that the confession was not obtained by oppression of the person who made it. Oppression is defined to include torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the use or threat of violence.

1) What an important aspect of the investigation of offenses is? 2) What the aim of the questioning is? 3) What done in order to ensure that suspects are not is to be coerced into confessions by unacceptable means? 4) Who be offered the services of a lawyer must? 5) What in the rejection of a confession as evidence results? 6) Is to answer any question or to give evidence a person suspected of a criminal offense obliged? 7) What the law relating to confessions in England did consist of? 8) What the investigating police officer administer to the suspect should? 9) When this caution was required to be given? 10) What the trial judge the discretion to exclude the evidence gave? 11) When a confession by an accused person be may admitted in evidence? 12) What oppression defined to include is?

II. Agree or disagree with the following statements.

1) The aim of the questioning is to offend suspect’s sense of justice. 2) Admission of offence leads to freedom. 3) Plea of guilty leads to a contested trial. 4) Restrictions are not to be placed on the methods of interrogation. 5) Any suspect must not be offered the services of a lawyer. 6) The services of a lawyer must be offered at the expense of the suspect. 7) Failure to advise the suspect of his right to be offered the services of a lawyer does not result in the rejection of a confession as evidence. 8) A person suspected of a criminal offense is obliged to answer any question. 9) A person accused of a criminal offense is obliged to give evidence. 10) The admission as evidence at trial of any involuntary statement made by an accused person is allowed. 11) The interrogator doesn’t caution the suspect that he is not obliged to answer any question. 12) The interrogator doesn’t caution the suspect that anything he says might be given in evidence at his trial. 13) This caution is required to be given at the end of any period of interrogation. 14) This caution is required to be given immediately after the suspect begins to make a statement or confession. 15) Failure to give the caution at the right time necessarily means that the statement will be excluded from evidence. 16) Failure to give the caution in the right form doesn’t give the trial judge the discretion to exclude the evidence if he considers it just to do so. 17) A confession by an accused person must be admitted in evidence even if it was obtained by oppression of the person. 18) Oppression does not include the use or threat of violence.

III. Restore the word order in the following statements.

1) Interrogation to obtain an admission of the offense is. 2) Admission of offence to a plea of guilty leads. 3) Plea of guilty the need for a contested trial leads to avoid. 4) Restrictions to are be placed on the methods of interrogation. 5) Any suspect be offered the services of a lawyer must. 6) The services of a lawyer must be at the expense of the state offered. 7) Failure results to advise the suspect of his right to be offered the services of a lawyer in the rejection of a confession as evidence. 8) A person suspected of a criminal offense obliged is not to answer any question. 9) A person obliged accused of a criminal offense is not to give evidence. 10) The admission is as evidence at trial of any involuntary statement made by an accused person strictly prohibited. 11) The interrogator the suspect that he is not obliged to answer any question cautions. 12) The interrogator the suspect that anything he says might be given in evidence at his trial cautions. 13) This caution is to be given at the beginning of any period of interrogation required. 14) This caution is to be given required immediately before the suspect begins to make a statement or confession. 15) Failure mean to give the caution at the right time or in the right form does not necessarily that the statement will be excluded from evidence. 16) Failure gives to give the caution at the right time or in the right form the trial judge the discretion to exclude the evidence if he considers it just to do so. 17) A confession by an accused person may be in evidence provided that the court is admitted satisfied that the confession was not obtained by oppression of the person who made it. 18) Oppression is to include the use or threat of violence defined.

IV. Translate the following words and phrases from Russian into English.

Допрос; признание; отказ; недобровольное заявление; делать предостережение; сделать заявление; усмотрение; допустить в качестве доказательства; притеснение; пытка; бесчеловечный; унижать; признание в совершении преступления; заявление подсудимого о признании вины; состязательный процесс; ограничения; принуждать; содержащийся под стражей; неисполнение; обращение; оскорбить чувство справедливости.

V. Complete the following statements.

1) The interrogation of suspected persons is … 2) The aim of the questioning is … 3) Admission of offence leads to … 4) Plea of guilty leads to avoid … 5) Restrictions are to be placed on the methods of interrogation in order to … 6) Any suspect who is being interrogated in custody must be … 7) The services of a lawyer must be offered at … 8) Failure to advise the suspect of his right to be offered the services of a lawyer results in … 9) A person suspected of a criminal offense is not obliged … 10) A person accused of a criminal offense is not obliged … 11) The admission as evidence … is strictly prohibited. 12) The investigating police officer is to administer … 13) This caution is required to be given at … 14) This caution is required to be given immediately before … 15) Failure to give the caution does not necessarily mean that … 16) Failure to give the caution does give … 17) A confession by an accused person may be admitted in evidence provided that … 18) Oppression is defined to include …

VI. Choose one topic to speak about a) aims and methods of interrogation; b) the suspect and the services of a lawyer; c) the suspect and his obligation; d) interrogator and his caution; e) the suspect and his confession. Retell the text Interrogation and confession.