Published: December 21, 2011

The New York Times

Task 9. Make a written annotation to the article “California’s lethal injections” in Russian

Аннотация представляет собой сжатое описание материала и ставит своей целью дать читателю представление о том, что сообщается в первоисточнике. Автор аннотации дает лишь общее представление о содержании оригинала, отмечая важнейшие позиции, но не раскрывая их сути.

For the next session (Master’s Programme)

Task 1. Imagine that a crime has taken place. Look at sentences 1 – 15 (which explain what happens next) and rearrange the letters in bold to make words and expressions. The first letter of each word / expression is in the correct place. Note that one word is used twice, but with a different meaning

1. Once the crime has been cedmitomt, it is rotpeder to the police by the vitmic.

2. The police arrive at the sneec of the crime to itsanetiveg what has happened.

3. They look for important cesul and other ecdnevie (for example, fingerprints or a genetic profile) that will help them to identify the crupitl.

4. In some cases, they will also try to establish if the mudso odiranpe (a Latin expression which

describes the way in which the crime was carried out) matches other crimes in the area.

5. If they have a stupsce who doesn't have a good iblia, they will then arepnhedp him*.

6. When he is artsrede, the police will conutia him (in other words, they warn him that anything he says might be used later in court).

7. He is then taken to the police station, where he is iewervinted by the iigengstatinv oerfsicf.

8. He is allowed to have a sitocirol present if he wants.

9. If he wants lagle ratprstionneee at this stage, but cannot afford it, the police must provide it.

10. If, at the end of the interview, the police believe that they have the right man, they ceragh him with the crime.

11. A stemnttae is prepared, which is signed by all parties present.

12. The ascedcu is then either redseale on bali (in other words, he is allowed to leave the police

station and go home in exchange for a financial 'deposit', on condition that he promises to appear

in court when required: if he doesn't appear in court, he will lose this deposit and a twrraan will

be issued for his arrest), or he is rdaeedmn in cysodut and locked in a cell to prevent him from

running away.

13. More questioning will probably follow: the police need as much pofor as possible (anything that is assdblimie in court will help them to get a cinonctivo), and they may also be interested in any apcosmiccel who may have helped their man.

14. The police will also want to talk to any wisestsen who were present when the crime took place.

15. The next day, the man appears before a metgiasrat in a metgiasrats' court. If the police present their csea properly and have followed all the correct procedures and protocols, he will then be cedmitomt for tirla at a Conwr Court.

* or her, of course!

Task 2. Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow

Many legal theorists have argued that the only morally legitimate goal in imposing criminal penalties against certain behaviors is to prevent people from harming others. Clearly, such theorists would oppose laws that force people to act purely for their own good or to refrain from certain harmless acts purely to ensure conformity to some social norm. But the goal of preventing harm to others would also justify legal sanctions against some forms of nonconforming

(10) behavior to which this goal might at first seem not to apply.

In many situations it is in the interest of each member of a group to agree to behave in a certain way on the condition that the others similarly agree.

15) In the simplest cases, a mere coordination of activities is itself the good that results. For example, it is in no one's interest to lack a convention about which side of the road to drive on, and each person can agree to drive on one side assuming the others do

(20) too. Any fair rule, then, would be better than no rule at all. On the assumption that all people would voluntarily agree to be subject to a coordination rule backed by criminal sanctions, if people could be assured that others would also agree, it is argued to

(25) be legitimate for a legislature to impose such a rule. This is because prevention of harm underlies the rationale for the rule, though it applies to the problem of coordination less directly than to other problems, for the act that is forbidden (driving on the other side

(30) of the road) is not inherently harm-producing, as are burglary and assault; instead, it is the lack of a coordinating rule that would be harmful.

In some other situations involving a need for legally enforced coordination, the harm to be averted

(35) goes beyond the simple lack of coordination itself. This can be illustrated by an example of a coordination rule-instituted by a private athletic organization-which has analogies in criminal law. At issue is whether the use of anabolic steroids, which

(40) build muscular strength but have serious negative side

effects, should be prohibited. Each athlete has at stake both an interest in having a fair opportunity to win and an interest in good health. If some competitors use steroids, others have the option of either

(45) endangering their health or losing their fair opportunity to win. Thus they would be harmed either way. A compulsory rule could prevent that harm and thus would be in the interest of all competitors. If they understand its function and trust the techniques

(50) for its enforcement, they will gladly consent to it. So while it might appear that such a rule merely forces people to act for their own good, the deeper rationale for coercion here-as in the above example-is a somewhat complex appeal to the legitimacy of

(55) enforcing a rule with the goal of preventing harm.

1. Which one of the following most accurately states the main point of the passage?

(A) In order to be morally justifiable, laws prohibiting activities that are not inherently harm-producing must apply equitably to everyone.

(B) It is justifiable to require social conformity where noncompliance would be harmful to either the nonconforming individual or the larger group.

(C) Achieving coordination can be argued to be a morally legitimate justification for rules that prevent directly harmful actions and others that prevent indirectly harmful actions.

(D) It is reasonable to hold that restricting individual liberty is always justified on the basis of mutually agreed-upon community standards.

(E) The principle of preventing harm to others can be used to justify laws that do not at first glance appear to be designed to prevent such harm.

2. It can be most reasonably inferred from the passage that the author considers which one of the following factors to be generally necessary for the justification of rules compelling coordination of people's activities?

(A) evidence that such rules do not force individuals to act for their own good

(B) enactment of such rules by a duly elected or appointed government lawmaking organization

(C) the assurance that criminal penalties are provided as a means of securing compliance with such rules

(D) some form of consent on the part of rational people who are subject to such rules,

(E) a sense of community and cultural uniformity among those who are required to abide by such rules

3. It can be most reasonably inferred from the passage that the author would agree with which one of the following statements?

(A) In all situations in which compulsory rules are needed for the coordination of human activities, any uniformly enforced rule is as acceptable as any other

(B) No private organizational rules designed to coordinate the activities of members have as complex a relation to the goal of preventing harm as have some criminal statutes.

(C) Every fair rule that could be effectively used to prescribe which side of the road to drive on is a rule whose implementation would likely cause less harm than it would prevent.

(D) There would be little need for formal regulation and enforcement of conventional driving patterns if all drivers understood and accepted the rationale behind such regulation and enforcement.

(E) Unlike rules forbidding such acts as burglary and assault, those that are designed primarily to prevent the inconvenience and chaos of uncoordinated activities should not involve criminal penalties.

4. The author distinguishes between two examples of coordinating rules on the basis of whether or not such rules

(A) prevent some harm beyond that which consists simply in a lack of coordination

(B) are intended to ensure conformity to a set of agreed-upon standards

(C) are voluntarily agreed upon by all those affected by such rules

(D) could be considered justifiable by the legal theorists discussed in the passage

(E) apply less directly to the problem of preventing harm than do rules against burglary and assault

5. Which one of the following is a rule that primarily addresses a problem of coordination most similar to that discussed in the second paragraph?

(A) a rule requiring that those who wish to dig for ancient artifacts secure the permission of relevant authorities and the owners of the proposed site before proceeding with their activities

(B) a rule requiring that pharmacists dispense certain kinds of medications only when directed to do so by physicians' prescriptions, rather than simply selling medicines at the customers' request

(C) a rule requiring that advertisers be able to substantiate the claims they make in advertisements, rather than simply saying whatever they think will help to attract customers

(D) a rule requiring that employees of a certain restaurant all wear identical uniforms during their hours of employment, rather than wearing whatever clothes they choose

(E) a rule requiring different aircraft to fly at different altitudes rather than flying at any altitude their pilots wish

6. In line 54, the author uses the expression "somewhat complex" primarily to describe reasoning that

(A) involves two layers of law, one governing the private sector and the other governing the public sector

(B) requires that those affected by the rule understand the motivation behind its imposition

(C) involves a case in which a harm to be prevented is indirectly related to the kind of act that is to be prohibited

(D) can convince athletes that their health is as important as their competitive success

(E) illustrates how appeals to the need for coordination can be used to justify many rules that do not involve coordination

Task 3. Directions: Select the best answer for each question

1. In recent years, attacks by Dobermans on small children have risen dramatically. Last year saw 35 such attacks in the continental United States alone, an increase of almost 21% over the previous year's total. Clearly, then, it is unsafe to keep dogs as pets if one has small children in the house.

The argument above depends upon which of the following assumptions?

1. No reasonable justification for these attacks by Dobermans on small children has been discovered.

2. Other household pets, such as cats, don't display the same violent tendencies that dogs do.

3. The number of attacks by Dobermans on small children will continue to rise in the coming years.

4. A large percentage of the attacks by Dobermans on small children could have been prevented by proper training.

(E) The behavior toward small children exhibited by Dobermans is representative of dogs in general.

2. Statistics show that more than half of the nation's murder victims knew their assailants; in fact, 24% last year were killed by relatives. Nor was death always completely unexpected. In one study, about half the murder victims in a particular city had called for police protection at least 5 times during the 24 months before they were murdered. Nonetheless, most people are more likely to fear being killed by a stranger in an unfamiliar situation than by a friend or relative at home.

Which of the following, if true, best explains the reaction of most people to the likelihood of being murdered?

1. Statistics are likely to be discounted no matter what the source, if their implication seems to run counter to common sense.

2. In the face of such upsetting problems as murder and assault, most people are more likely to react emotionally than rationally.

3. A study taken in only one city is not likely to have an effect on attitudes until similar studies have been undertaken at the national level and have yielded similar results.

4. Most people do not consider themselves to be in the high-risk groups in which murder occurs frequently between relations, but do see themselves as at least minimally susceptible to random violence.

(E) People who seek police protection from relatives and friends are often unwilling to press charges when the emotions of the moment have cooled.

3. The rate of violent crime in this state is up 30% from last year. The fault lies entirely in our court system: Recently our judges' sentences have been so lenient that criminals can now do almost anything without fear of a long prison term.

The argument above would be weakened if it were true that

1. 85% of the other states in the nation have lower crime rates than does this state

2. white-collar crime in this state has also increased by over 25% in the last year

3. of the police in this state have been laid off in the last year due to budget cuts

4. polls show that 65% of the population in this state oppose capital punishment

5. the state has hired 25 new judges in the last year to compensate for deaths and retirements

4. The state legislature has proposed a new law that would provide a tax credit to people who install alarm systems in their homes. Members of the legislature claim that the new law will reduce crime, citing studies showing that crime rates fall as the percentage of homes with alarm systems rises.

Which of the following, if true, would cast the most doubt on the claim that the new law will reduce crime?

1. No law can prevent crime altogether.

1. The amount of the tax credit is so low relative to the cost of alarm systems that very few people will install alarm systems in order to obtain this credit.

2. Neighborhood crime prevention programs can reduce crime as effectively as alarm systems can.

3. The state would have to build more prisons to house all the people caught by the new alarm systems.

4. The state cannot afford to reduce taxes any further.

5. Countries A and B are in competition to draw tourists to their countries. In Country A, about 2,500 violent crimes are reported per year. In Country B, about 1,000 violent crimes are reported per year. Trying to draw tourists away from Country A, officials in Country B use these violent crime statistics to claim it has a lower violent crime rate than Country A.

Which of the following, if true, would expose the flaw in Country B's argument that it has the lower violent crime rate?

1. Most violent criminals in Country B are repeat offenders.

2. White-collar crime is higher in Country B than in Country A.

3. The population of Country A is 20 times greater than the population of Country B.

4. Country B has fewer tourists than Country A.

5. Country A has a better prison system than Country B.

6. During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis of those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.

Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?

1. Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United States in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas

2. Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths

3. Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries

4. Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths

5. Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces

7. In interviews with jurors inquiring how they arrived at their verdicts, researchers found that 40% of the references jurors made were to factors that had not been included in courtroom testimony. To improve the jury system, the researchers suggested that judges give instructions to the jury at the beginning of a trial rather than at the end. They argued that this would permit jurors to concentrate on the most relevant evidence rather than filling in gaps with their own assumptions, which have little to do with the legality of a case.

The answer to which of the following questions is LEAST directly relevant to evaluating the researchers' suggestion above?

1. Is it possible for a judge to instruct a jury at the end of a trial in such a way that jurors will disregard any irrelevant factors they had been using to weigh the evidence?

2. Will a jury that hears a judge's instructions at the beginning of a trial be able to weigh the evidence accordingly once that evidence has actually been presented?

3. Will having judges give instructions at the beginning of a trial rather than at the end significantly alter the customary procedures employed by the judicial system?

4. When jurors are queried as to how they arrived at their verdicts, does their interpretation of their decision-making process include many references to factors that were not, in fact, influential?

5. If jurors hear the judge's instructions at the beginning of a trial, what percentage of the factors that influence their decisions will be matters that were not presented in the evidence?

Task 4.