200.00 руб


Контрольная работа, вариант 2, СибЮИ

Дата сдачи: Июль 2007

I. Перепишите предложения; подчеркните в каждом из них глагол-сказуемое и определите его видовременную форму и залог. Переведите предложения на русский язык. В разделе (b) обратите внимание на перевод пассивных конструкций.

1) Last year I didn’t know anything about the judicial system of England.
2) At the beginning of the seminar one of our students will be making a report of the Rights of the Defendant according to the Russian Criminal Court.

3) The press says that the trade delegation has already finished its work.
has finished
b) 1) The convicted was taken to prison to serve his sentence.

2) Cases are usually classified as civil, criminal and administrative.

II. Перепишите предложения; подчеркните в них Participle I и Participle II и установите функции каждого из них, то есть укажите, является ли оно определением, обстоятельством или частью глагола-сказуемого. Переведите предложения на русский язык.

1) When asked at the English lesson, my friend makes no mistakes.
2) While going home I met one of my friends
3) It is an established fact.
III. Перепишите предложения; подчеркните в каждом слове модальный глагол или его эквивалент. Переведите предложения на русский язык.

1) In order to become a low all bills and resolutions must pass both the houses and must be signed by the President.
2) Can you use the weapon and drive a car?
3) The man has to return the documents.
4) May the students leave the room?
5) The investigator was able to collect evidence on this case.

IV Найдите в правом столбике объяснения терминам, данным в левом столбике:

V. Заполните пропуски в предложениях подходящими по смыслу словами, данными под чертой.

Solicitor, trial, jury, verdict, warders, inquest, coroner, plain clothes, detective, death penalty.

VI. Прочитайте и письменно переведите текст.

Nature of investigation

A criminal investigator is a person who collects facts to accomplish a threefold aim: to identify and locate the guilty party and to provide evidence of his guilt. Investigator is an art and science. The tools of the investigator are for the sake of simplicity, referred to as the three «I's», namely: Information, Investigation and Instrumentation. By the application of the tree «l's» in varying proportions the investigator gathers the facts which are necessary to establish the guilt of the accused in a criminal trial.
It should be noted, that there are no normative criteria for judging the success or failure of an investigation. The fact that the crime remains unsolved does not indicate a deficiency in the investigation; nor does a convection of the accused necessarily mean that the investigation was conducted in an intelligent manner. An investigation may be considered a success if all the available information relevant and material to the issues or allegations of the case is uncovered. There is, however, no way of knowing, ordinarily, whether the information was available.
It is a common misconception that every crime is intrinsically soluble; that there is always sufficient evidence available to reveal the identity of !he criminal; that the perpetrator always leaves traces at the crime scene which, in the hands of a discerning investigator or technician, will lead inevitably to his door. Many crimes are not susceptible of solution by reason of the fact that the evidence is insufficient. The absence of eyewitnesses, discernible motives and physical clues will obviously prohibit a solution unless the malefactor confesses. Often, the corpus delicti or fact that the crime was committed cannot be established, and even a confession is of little value.
The concept of "solving crime» does not satisfy the requirements of a completed investigation. To the general public, this term describes merely the process of discovering the identity of the suspect and apprehending him. These achievements, however, are but two of the objectives of an investigation and leave the investigator far from his ultimate goal of presenting sufficient evidence in a court of law to warrant a conviction.
Finding the perpetrator is frequently the simplest phase of the investigation; obtaining the evidence to support the charge in court is often an exceedingly complex task.

Задать вопрос по работе