Read the text. Predict which words are omitted.

Listen to an audio and fill in the gaps.

LISTENING 1

Police in Italy have arrested a former cabinet 1. ___________on suspicion of helping a businessman 2._____________ of Mafia links flee the country. Claudio Scajola was industry minister in the last government of ex-Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. He is 3.__________ of helping Calabrian businessman Amedeo Matacena escape a five-year jail term and transfer his fortune 4.__________ after he was convicted of mafia association last year. Gianfranco Ardizzone from the Anti-Mafia Investigation Department said Scajola had tried to use his influence as a high level politician: “The purpose was to 5. _______ him (Matacena) to go to Lebanon, where he could get the political asylum. And this, because of his former minister relationships, at a political and economic 6.________.” Scajola had been expected to be a candidate for Forza Italia in the European 7._____________ later this month. In the end he was not selected although Berlusconi denied it was because of this 8.________. It remains to be seen how much of an impact the scandal will have on Forza Italia’s fortunes in the elections.

LISTENING 2

Listen to the audio and answer the multiple choice questions below.

 

o What was one of the crimes that the criminal was "brought in" for?

a) assault b) murder c) jay walking d) breaking and entering

 

o What did the criminal steal from the store?

a) a candy bar b) gas c) a car d) money

 

o What crime does the officer think should have been added to the list?

a) jay walking b) trespassing c) speeding d) tampering with evidence

 

o What has the neighborhood the criminal was in been suffering from lately?

a) a rash of burglaries b) trespassing violations c) car jackings d) gang violence

 

o The person who called the police on the criminal is part of the…

a) gang b) the criminal's family c) police force d) neighborhood watch

 

o What was the charge the criminal received for pushing the police officer at the scene?

a) disorderly conduct b) jay walking c) assault and battery d) shoplifting

 

o What was the crime the criminal committed last month?

a) carjacking b) shoplifting c) trespassing d) breaking and entering

 

o Does the criminal admit to being guilty?

a) yes b) he doesn't say c) no d) he's not sure

 

Read the text paying attention to the new vocabulary and do the tasks which follow:

The Criminal Law

Criminal Law in Canada

Criminal law is a category of public law that punishes behaviour that results in injury to people and/or property. In Canada, most criminal law is made by the federal government. Some laws made by the provincial and municipal governments are called "quasi-criminal." For example: offences under the Motor Vehicle Act. "Quasi" is Latin for "as if". Most of the criminal laws are found in the Criminal Code of Canada which applies to all provinces and territories in Canada. It contains a description of crimes and criminal law procedures.

Principles of Criminal Law

Presumption of innocence is a principle of the Canadian criminal justice system. The accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Burden of proof means that it is Crown counsel’s responsibility to prove that the accused is guilty. The defense lawyer does not have to prove that the accused is innocent. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the expression used when determining the likelihood that the accused committed a crime. The Crown must prove that the accused is guilty and there cannot be any reasonable doubt about it in the minds of the judge or jury. If there is a reasonable doubt then the accused must be found not guilty.

Types of Crime

In the Criminal Code of Canada, three broad categories of criminal offences are used. The least serious are summary conviction offences, the more serious are called indictable offences. An offence that can be a summary offence or an indictable offence is known as a dual or hybrid offence. Summary conviction offences are punishable by no more than six months in prison or a fine. Indictable offences allow for life sentences and larger fines. The punishment for a dual or hybrid offence is determined by the Crown’s election of whether to proceed summarily or by indictment, with the Code prescribing available sentences. For some hybrid offences, summary proceedings can result in penalties higher than those allowable for straight summary offences (for example, assault causing bodily harm, upon summary conviction, is punishable by a maximum of 18 months in jail.) The Criminal Code of Canada has distinguished between different types of offences for three reasons. First, some offences cause greater harm to individuals or society. Second, some offences are considered more morally repugnant than others and third because some offences are conducted against property while others are against people.

The Elements of a Crime

A crime occurs when an individual breaks one of our criminal laws. Every crime has two essential parts: the physical action or actus reus and the intent or mens rea (guilty mind). For example, the crime of arson has two parts: actually setting fire to a building and doing it wilfully and deliberately. Setting a fire by accident may not be a crime. For most criminal cases both the actus reus and the mens rea must be proven. If either element is missing, then no crime has been committed.

Actus reus

The physical act of committing an offence (actus reus) is more than an act, it can be an omission to act or a ‘state of being’. For example if one is in possession of an illegal narcotic, one is not acting or failing to act but merely in possession. This is a state of being. Omissions to act can also be crimes (a failure to act when required to do so by law). If a parent fails to provide the basic necessities for children’s survival the failure to provide is an omission and a crime. The majority of crimes are acts or kinds of misconduct. Proof of the physical element requires more than simply determining an act, omission or state of being exists. It is necessary to consider the four C’s-conduct, consequences, circumstances and causation. The conduct must be as described earlier an act, omission to act or a state of being as outlined in a specific section of the criminal charge. Of particular importance to the concept of conduct is that it be voluntary. The law will not hold someone criminally responsible for an involuntary act. Consequences refer to the outcome of a specific act. For a homicide the consequence would be the death of a human being. The circumstances aspect of the actus reus refers to the relevant circumstances under which an act must occur to be criminal. In the case of the crime of trespassing at night the relevant circumstances would be that the act occurred at night, on someone’s property other than your own and that you entered the property without consent or lawful excuse. The final element is causation, meaning that the conduct of the accused person must be shown to have caused the consequence (the criminal act) to occur. If Sally is charged with murdering Bill then it must be proven that Sally’s conduct caused the death of Bill.

Mens rea

The physical act represents one element in the commission of a criminal act while the guilty mind represents the second key element. The guilty mind refers to the intention, knowledge or recklessness of the accused. Essentially the law states that we must mean to cause a wrongful consequence. Intention is commonly used in the Criminal Code to establish a type of guilty mind. Words like ‘willfully,’ ‘means to’ or ‘intentionally’ are used to describe a state of mind. There are two basic types of intention-specific and general. Specific intent offences frequently use the phrase ‘with intent’ or ‘for the purpose of’ to demonstrate a specific purpose behind the crime. General intent crimes are those that do not require a further purpose or intention and are often crimes committed in moments of uncontrolled passion or aggression. The knowledge form of a guilty mind means that the accused must have knowledge of the specific circumstances of the crime. The phrases ‘knowingly’ or ‘knowing’ are commonly used here to indicate a specific type of knowledge. For example, to knowingly lie to a judge or jury is called perjury and is a criminal offence but to give false evidence unknowingly is not a criminal offence. The third kind of intent is recklessness. This is type of intent is found in crimes like dangerous driving causing death. It means that the accused has been unduly careless in their actions by not exercising good judgment and foresight. If one drives 100km/h through a school zone in the daytime, with no intention of killing or harming a child, and hits a child crossing the street and that child dies, the law would use recklessness to establish the guilty mind. Contrary to TV law, it is not necessary for the Crown to establish why an accused has committed an offence (the motive). Motive may be used to establish intention and can be used in sentencing to mitigate or aggravate the sentence depending on the reason for committing the crime.

 

Criminal Case Studies