Discussion

11. Speak on the difference between extortion and blackmail. Use the following words and phrases:

• to constitute;

• wrongful use of force and fear;

• to obtain consent;

• nondisclosure of discreditable secrets;

• threat of exposure;

• hush money.

12. Describe the acts and types of people’s behavior making certain places “disorderly houses”. Use the following words and phrases:

• breach of the peace;

• to corrupt the morals;

• public resort;

• drug addict;

• drunkard;

• to maintain a “disorderly house”.

13. Speak on the main characteristics of the crime of forgery. Use the following words and phrases:

• material alteration;

• intent to defraud;

• the mode of writing;

• the term “falsely”;

• stamping;

• engraving;

• to be not genuine;

• a false statement of fact;

• a concomitant of the act of forgery.

14. Divide the paragraphs describing the crimes of extortion and blackmail, false pretenses, and forgery into logical parts and entitle each of them.

15. Work in pairs:

a) Look at the following words and phrases and think of a story that might combine them all. You may reorder them in any way you want to using any form of the verb:

• she tried to obtain her husband’s property;

• the making of an intentionally false statement;

• the victim relied on it;

• the accused was well aware of its falsity;

• he obtained money by a “confidence game”;

• he reposed trust in her;

• she made three fraudulent statements.

b) When you have decided upon the story, tell it to your partner. Then listen to that of your partner. Ask each other as many questions as you can to learn further details or clarify some points.

16. Give summaries of the paragraphs you got interested in most of all.

17. Speak individually or arrange a discussion on the following.

• The crime of escape is especially dangerous for the community.

• Threats of accusation or exposure are often connected with blackmail.

• “Disorderly houses” are frequently customized by the young drug addicts.

Case study

18. Scrutinize the situation and provide detailed and motivated answers to the questions given below.

Identify key points in the article and extract information from it to pass on to somebody else.

GOING DUTCH?

A Police Foundation report is about to recommend major changes to Britain’s drugs laws. The government should respond without delay.

The most far-reaching inquiry into drugs legislation for a quarter of a century will call next month for the decriminalisation of cannabis use and a fundamental shake-up of Britain’s drugs laws. The findings of the special committee will provoke controversy and put pressure on the government to rethink its approach to drugs. It has spent two-and-a-half years examining the current state of the law.

The committee has concluded that the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act is arbitrary and inconsistent, and imposes heavy demands on the criminal justice system to little public benefit. Its most controversial recommendation is that possession of cannabis should never attract a prison sentence, but should instead be subject to fines or other penalties. At present possession of cannabis can be punished by up to seven years in jail. About 500 people were imprisoned in 1977 for possession of cannabis. And yet trade in cannabis and its use is an entrenched part of British life – as Jack Straw, the home secretary, well knows. His own teenage son was caught offering to sell cannabis to two reporters a couple of years ago [18].

Questions:

1. Do you think the British government should rethink its approach to drugs? Why?

2. Why does the committee recommend that possession of cannabis should never attract a prison sentence, but should instead be subject to fines or other penalties?

3. Do you think seven years in jail to be an adequate punishment for possession of cannabis? Try and prove your point of view.

4. Why has trade in cannabis become especially dangerous for Britain?

5. Don’t you think Russia’s drugs laws should be drastically changed?