Comprehension Check

1. Look through the text and say whether the following statements are true or false.

1. If actus and mens have been proved, a defendant is found guilty.

2. Only a few systems of law recognize the defence of self-defence.

3. There is no difference between the concept of defence and that of mitigation.

4. A defendant can't avoid guilt for injuring someone in the case of self-defence.

2. Look through paragraph 1 and expand the following statements. Add information from the text.

1. English law sometimes allows the defence of duress.

2. One of the defences is the defence of insanity.

3. Mitigating circumstances may make crime less serious.

4. Recently new laws have been passed.

3. On the basis of paragraph 2 try to explain what insanity and intoxication are using your own words and giving your own examples.

3. Reread paragraphs 3-5 and find the answers to the following questions:

1. What is the difference between a defence and mitigation?

2. What new kinds of crime can you name existing in England and in your country?

3. What are the reasons of the fastest growing areas of the law?

3. Look through the text and match the terms and their definitions. Consult the glossary if necessary. Translate the definitions.

1. Defence	a) a defect of reason, arising from mental disease that is severe enough to prevent a defendant from knowing what he did;
2. Duress	b) a pleading served by the defendant in answer to the plaintiff's statement of claim;
3. Insanity	c) pressure, especially actual or threatened physical force, put on a person to act in a particular way;
4. Self-defence	d) a defence at common law to charges of offences against the person when reasonable force is used to defend oneself against attack or threatened attack.

Discussion Points

1. "Criminals need help more than punishment". Write a paragraph containing two arguments for and two against this statement.

2. Speak about defences the court uses to excuse a person’s criminal act.

3. Give points for and against euthanasia.

Extra Activity

1. Read the text and do the tasks that follow. Helicopter Plucks Two from Jail

Rome: Two gunmen yesterday hijacked a Red Cross helicopter, lifted two inmates from a Rome prison courtyard and flew off in a hail of automatic gunfire. A third prisoner ran to the helicopter, but slipped in the rain.

After taking off from the prison, the helicopter landed in a Rome football field where a match was underway, and the hijackers and escapees fled by car.

Officials said the two hijackers spoke French and that one of the escapees, a Tunisian-born Frenchman, was caught by French authorities for a Paris bank robbery and murder. The other one was suspected of supplying arms to Italian terrorists.

Police said the hijackers waited in San Camilio Hospital in Western Rome and cornered the helicopter pilot, Mr Mauro Pompa, aged 42.

They handcuffed the pilot's 10-year-old son to a radiator and forced Mr Pompa at gunpoint to take them to the helicopter parked across the street.

The white helicopter with red crosses painted on each side then flew across the city to Rebibbia prison in eastern Rome. There, it hovered a yard above the courtyards where about 50 inmates were exercising, deputy warden, Mr Giancarlo Baldassini, said as the hijackers fired automatic weapons for cover and lowered a rope ladder, two inmates dashed to the helicopter and jumped in. A guard at Rebibbia prison was slightly injured by flying glass during the gun battle.

Two shots fired by a guard hit the helicopter.

(from The Gardian)

Notes: pluck - зд. забирать

hijack - угнать самолет

1. Write down in order the places where the gunmen went.

2. True, false, or don't know: the escape plan originally included three prisoners.

3. Write down four or more things that prove that the escape was carefully planned.

4. How do you think officials found out that the hijackers spoke French?