Змістовиймодуль5

Тема10:The Court System of Ukraine.

Завдання для перевірки знань лексики

Для більш ґрунтовного вивчення НТ 10 необхідно опрацювати зміст текстів, а саме:

Текст №1: Judicial system of Ukraine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Ukraine

Текст №2: Court and Arbitration in Ukraine

www.hg.org/article.asp?id=5682

Завдання до тексту №1: Judicial system of Ukraine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Ukraine

1. Прочитайте та перекладіть текст.

2. Схематично відобразіть судову систему України.

Завдання до тексту №2: Court and Arbitration in Ukraine

www.hg.org/article.asp?id=5682

1. Прочитайте та письмово перекладіть текст.

2. Випишіть незнайомі слова з транскрипцією та перекладом.

3. Ознайомтесь з новою лексикою та вивчіть її.

Завдання для перевірки знань граматики

1. Виконайте завдання І, II.EnglishforLawyers: навчальний посібник / Кафедра мовознавства. – Хмельницький: ХУУП, 2011. – С.184-185.

Завдання для перевірки розуміння прочитаного

Прочитайте текст та проаналізуйте текст. Дайте письмово відповіді на запитання до тексту.

DNA

Deoxyribonucleic acid, commonly called DNA, determines characteristics such as hair color, susceptibility to certain illnesses, and height, as well as every other inherited physical trait of an individual. Found in the nucleus of every cell, DNA is unique for each individual—a genetic fingerprint. DNA from any tissue, sperm, skin, blood, or any other cell can identify the individual from which it came. Recently scientists have found that DNA is extremely useful in criminal inves­tigations. The genetic code of a sample of blood, sperm, or tissue found on the scene of a crime can be matched to that of a suspect and is extremely accurate in identifying the person who left the sample. The identification is so conclusive that there is only one in two billion chances of its being wrong. It has proved to be particularly useful in identifying rapists and the parents of children.

One of the first cases in which DNA proved useful in the United States was that of the Congress Avenue rapist. The Boynton Beach, Florida, rapes began in December 1986 with an attack on a young mother pushing her baby in a stroller through a park on Congress Avenue. Subsequent victims in the vicinity were joggers. The rapist always wore a black knitted ski mask and surgical gloves so there was no way for the victims to identify him. The assaults lasted for 10 months while the police were unable to find any suspects.

But then a police officer spotted a pickup truck in the vicinity of a rape. Tracking the license to a golf course in the area, police searched the locker of the truck's owner, George Forrest, a groundskeeper and found a black knitted mask and surgical gloves. Confronted with the evidence, George Forrest confessed. Later he recanted his confession, accusing the police of coercion. However, one victim who had been raped in her home became pregnant. Using theDNA from the fetus, scientists were able to identify the suspect as the father. Confession or not, there was no doubt that George Forrest was the Congress Avenue rapist.

Another demonstration of the detection power of DNA comes from a case in Great Britain. In 1983, a young woman was raped and murdered in Narborough, a small village in England. No clues were found and no suspect was apparent. Three years later, another young woman was raped and murdered in the same small town. This time a tip led to the arrest of a kitchen porter who confessed to the crime. However, the suspect's father, aware of the discovery of DNA as a genetic fingerprint and convinced of his son's innocence, insisted that his son's blood be compared to semen taken from the body. The samples did not match. The police demanded that every male in the vicinity born between 1953 and 1970 be tested. An employee at a local bakery, Colin Pitchfork, paid a coworker to take the test for him. When the police were informed of the payment, they tested Pitchfork. Sure enough, he was identified as the rapist.

The use of DNA as evidence is being contested in court. There is some question as to the procedure used in analyzing it in some laboratories. Is the use of DNA an invasion of a person's privacy? Should a defendant be allowed to refuse testing? Should the police keep a bank of DNA samples as they do fingerprints? Should people who are arrested automatically give DNA samples? Should everyone in an area be required to be tested, as in the case in Narborough? Would it be right for the police to take a hair from a suspect surreptitiously and have this tested?