法律英語(yǔ)口語(yǔ)試題及答案整理

1、法律英語(yǔ)口語(yǔ)試題及答案整理為什么理應(yīng)廢除死刑有這樣幾個(gè)理由：死刑是一個(gè)有缺；9. Todiscusstheimportance； Mirandawarningisawarning； Mirandawarningguranteest； Mirandawarningalsomeanst； thiswarningrestrainsthep；米蘭達(dá)警告：在刑事犯罪嫌疑人被詢問(wèn) 之前，警察將其；米蘭達(dá)警告為什么理應(yīng)廢除死刑有這樣幾個(gè)理由：死刑是一個(gè)有缺陷的機(jī)制。 證據(jù)表明，刑事司法系統(tǒng)(CJS)充斥著錯(cuò)誤、貪官污吏和有缺陷的做 法，但這個(gè)系統(tǒng)是仍然被授權(quán)作為執(zhí)行死刑的機(jī)構(gòu)。事實(shí)上，很多死 囚被宣布無(wú)罪，

2、僅在2003年就包括12例，這警示我們?cè)撓到y(tǒng)需要大 修。從道德的角度來(lái)說(shuō)：在很多情況下，關(guān)于死刑的道德爭(zhēng)論集中 在一以眼還眼II,或一以命抵命II的經(jīng)營(yíng)理念。這個(gè)論點(diǎn)主張死刑的 道義上的公正地懲罰死罪。不過(guò)，真正的道德問(wèn)題應(yīng)該是是否有人有 資格說(shuō)應(yīng)由誰(shuí)生誰(shuí)死。以另一個(gè)人的生命通過(guò)一種犯罪行為，或者通 過(guò)死刑是錯(cuò)誤的。在絕大部分情況下，已被判處死刑的罪犯被保留了 生命。不過(guò)，具有諷刺意味的是，一個(gè)理應(yīng)重視人的生命社會(huì)，卻剝 奪一個(gè)殺人犯的生命，而這個(gè)刑事司法系統(tǒng)有可能對(duì)無(wú)辜的人執(zhí)行死 刑？就費(fèi)用來(lái)說(shuō)：死囚監(jiān)獄需要比囚犯監(jiān)獄最為更昂貴的安全設(shè)施。 這種說(shuō)法是真實(shí)的。預(yù)審和審判死刑案件的成本遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)大于

3、非死刑案件。 此外，死刑案件的上訴和再審的成本是天文數(shù)字。省下來(lái)的錢應(yīng)該花 在預(yù)防犯罪方案和教育，重塑，回到發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)，而不是花費(fèi)數(shù)十億美 元在全國(guó)范圍內(nèi)譴責(zé)罪犯死刑，判處終身監(jiān)禁的囚犯。9. To discuss the importance of Miranda warning (P62)Miranda warning is a warning that is required to be given by police in the United States to criminal suspects in police custody before they are interrogat

4、ed to inform them about their constitutional rights. It includes the right toremain silent; being clearly informed of that anything the personsays will be used against that person in court; the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, if he or she is in

5、digent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent her or him.Miranda warning gurantees the constitutional rights citizens have during the criminal investigating process. Those rights are mainly from the fifth and sixth amendments.Miranda warning also means the confession made by the suspe

6、cts cannot be used as the evidence in court to make a sentence. Therefore,this warning restrains the police from using illegal methods through undue process to investigate the crime and to get confession from suspects.米蘭達(dá)警告：在刑事犯罪嫌疑人被詢問(wèn)之前，警察將其羈押時(shí)應(yīng) 該告訴他們的憲法權(quán)利。內(nèi)容包括：有權(quán)保持沉默；但其說(shuō)的每一句 話都將作為呈堂證供；有權(quán)咨詢律師，包括在其被

7、詢問(wèn)的過(guò)程中律師 也能夠在場(chǎng)。如果嫌疑人沒(méi)有錢請(qǐng)律師，也會(huì)為他免費(fèi)請(qǐng)代理律師。米蘭達(dá)警告保證了公民在刑事犯罪調(diào)查過(guò)程中的憲法權(quán)利，主要 是憲法修正案五和修正案六中的權(quán)利。米蘭達(dá)警告同時(shí)也意味著嫌疑人的供述不能作為法庭審判的依據(jù)。所以，米蘭達(dá)警告限制了警察用非法的訴訟程序去調(diào)查犯罪以及 從嫌疑人出得到供述。10. To discuss the function of voir dire (P89)The voir dire is the process used to select a jury.The prospective jurors are questioned about their

8、backgrounds and potential biases before being chosen to siton a jury. The function is to select a jury acceptable to both sides. Jurors are excluded by one or two methods： preemptory challenge and the challenge for cause. Jurors are excluded who1) have already formed an opinion about the guilt or in

9、nocence of the accused;2) are related to any of the parties or legal actors in the case;3) are physically or mentally impaired to the extent that the impairment will interfere with their decision-making process or4) are otherwise considered to be incapable of remaining impartial until the case is pr

10、esented.There are no limits to the number challenges for cause that either side may employ.Actually one of the unspoken purposes of the voir dire for the attorneys to get a feel for the personalities and likely views of the people on the jury panel.陪審團(tuán)資格審查程序是用來(lái)選擇一個(gè)合格的陪審團(tuán)。在被選擇成為一個(gè)真正的陪審團(tuán)成員之前，準(zhǔn)陪審員們被詢問(wèn)關(guān)

11、 于他們的背景和潛在的偏見(jiàn)的問(wèn)題。陪審團(tuán)資格審查程序的功能是選 擇一個(gè)能夠被雙方當(dāng)事人接受的陪審團(tuán)。排除不符合條件的準(zhǔn)陪審員 是通過(guò)一個(gè)或者兩個(gè)辦法，即無(wú)因回避和有因回避。被排除的陪審員 是以下幾種人：(1)己經(jīng)形成一個(gè)關(guān)于控告是否有罪或者無(wú)罪的觀點(diǎn) 的人（2）和本案中任何一方當(dāng)事人相關(guān)系或者法律問(wèn)題參與者相關(guān)系 的（3）以前在生理上和精神上受到過(guò)傷害的人，從某種水準(zhǔn)上來(lái)說(shuō)， 這種傷害會(huì)干預(yù)到他們的決策過(guò)程（4從其他方面來(lái)說(shuō)，是那些被認(rèn)為 不能保持公正直到案件被呈報(bào)的人。這里沒(méi)有限制對(duì)于任何一方可能被雇傭的有因回避的數(shù)量。事實(shí)上，陪審團(tuán)資格審查程序不言而喻的目的之一是對(duì)于律師來(lái) 說(shuō)能夠得到一種

12、對(duì)于他們的人格和可能的觀點(diǎn)被采納而且出現(xiàn)在陪審 團(tuán)成員的名單中的滿足感。11. on what do you think it is proper for the appellate courts to focus? （pl9）（你認(rèn)為上訴法院應(yīng)該如何合理行使權(quán)力?）The exercise of appellate jurisdiction is to review the action of the lower judicial tribunals of the state. Actually, the scope of judicial review which the court ex

13、ercises in such cases is relatively narrow;it does not retry the case on the merits, and it does not substitute its idea of justice for those of the trial court;what it does is to review the record of the proceedings to determine whether or not the lower court committed error on its procedure or in

14、applying the substantive law to the facts of the case.（行使上訴管轄權(quán)的法院職責(zé)即接收下級(jí)州司法審判機(jī)關(guān)的上訴。 事實(shí)上，這些法院在上訴案件上的司法審查權(quán)限是相對(duì)狹窄的。它不 對(duì)上訴案件的事實(shí)曲直實(shí)行重審，也并不完全*一審法院做出的審判意 見(jiàn)；它要所的是檢查一審法院的審判記錄來(lái)判定是否下級(jí)法院有在程 序和具體案件事實(shí)的法律適用上存有錯(cuò)誤。）In my view, it is proper to restrict the functions of appellate court in the law applying and procedur

15、easpects, instead of consuming another period of time to retry the case, which leads to a waste of judicial resources and failure to give its full attention to the novel and socially important controversies. This funtion may also better protect the appellate review right of each individual involved

16、in the case.（在我看來(lái)，應(yīng)該限制上訴法院在法律適用和程序等方面的權(quán)限， 而非耗費(fèi)時(shí)間實(shí)行重新審理，這樣會(huì)導(dǎo)致司法資源的浪費(fèi)而忽視新的 真正重要的社會(huì)矛盾。上訴法院的這種功能也將更有利于重新審查案 件中每個(gè)個(gè)體的權(quán)利。）12. What s the differences between the torts and crimes? （P62）（侵權(quán)與犯罪的差異何如？）As we all kown, important distinctions exist between civil and criminal laws. Civil violations （civil wrongs）a

17、re often referred to as torts.Here is a list of the main differences between crimes and torts：（眾所周知，民法和刑法之間存有著十分顯著的差異。民法上的過(guò) 錯(cuò)一般就指向侵權(quán)。以下是犯罪與侵權(quán)之間一些差別：）I NatureA crime is considered to be a wrong against all of society, whereas a tort is considered to be a private matter between the parties directly in

18、volved.(1、本質(zhì)上的差異犯罪指一種有違社會(huì)整體利益違法行為，而侵權(quán)則是發(fā)生在直接 相關(guān)的當(dāng)事人之間的一種私法上的違法行為。）II The persons who actually prosecute the case.A specially designated state prosecutor/federal official directs the proceedings when crimes are involved, However, in tort action the individual against whom the wrong has been committed

19、 generally hire an attorney to process the claim（2、提起訴訟的主體上的差異一旦有犯罪行為產(chǎn)生，特殊授權(quán)的檢察機(jī)關(guān)或者聯(lián)邦機(jī)構(gòu)將提起 公訴；而在侵權(quán)行為中，過(guò)錯(cuò)方的相對(duì)方個(gè)體（即受害人）通常聘請(qǐng) 一名律師實(shí)行訴訟。）III PunishmentsOne who commits a crime may be required to provide some forms of monetary restitution, additional punishments are also available, including fines, jail s

20、entences, removal from public office and even execution.Excepting fines,the above remedies are not available in tort law, tort restitution relies primarily on monetary, compensation.（3、法律責(zé)任的差異實(shí)施犯罪的人將可能被判要支付一定形式的金錢賠償，并且同時(shí) 需要接受包括罰金、監(jiān)禁、解除公職甚至剝奪生命等懲罰。而在侵權(quán)法上，除了罰金之外，以上的所有救濟(jì)方式都不適用。 侵權(quán)法中的救濟(jì)主要依靠金錢賠償。）IV Civi

21、l damages categorized in three typesCompensation paid in civil courts is called damages. There are general, special, and punitive damages. General damagescompensate for any specific and demonstrable harmthat has been caused.Special damagescompensate for conscious pain andsuffering.Punitive/exemplary

22、 damagesthe behavior of the actorwas the result of an intentional disregard for the safety or well-being of others.In many cases a person s behavior may bring about both criminal and tort liability. (For example, any time an individual has been intentionally and physically harmed by another, the sta

23、te may prosecute and punish, and the injured individual may also sue to recover civil damages.)(4、民事?lián)p害賠償在分類上具有特殊性，分為三種類型民事法庭中所判的補(bǔ)償稱為損害賠償，分為一般損害賠償、特殊 損害賠償以及懲罰性損害賠償。一般損害賠償指對(duì)己經(jīng)發(fā)生的任何特 定和可證的損害的補(bǔ)償；特殊損害賠償指對(duì)精神痛苦的補(bǔ)償；而懲罰 性賠償適用于行為人故意漠視他人安全或健康而產(chǎn)生的損害行為。在很多案例中，行為人的行為可能同時(shí)引發(fā)刑事責(zé)任和侵權(quán)責(zé)任。 譬如：一旦一個(gè)人遭受到行為人故意的身體侵害，聯(lián)邦就可能予以公

24、 訴并實(shí)行刑事處罰，同時(shí)，受害者也能夠訴諸法院來(lái)請(qǐng)求加害人承擔(dān) 民事上的損害賠償。)13. To discuss the process of the creation of case law (by)（談一下判例法的形成過(guò)程）The decisions of judges, or of other officials empowered by the constitution or laws of a political entity to hear and decide controversies, create case law. As the name -case law II sug

25、gests, a particular decision, or a collection of particular decisions, generate rules of general application, namely case law.It is a policy of the common law system that past judicial decisions are formally and generally binding for the disposition of similar present controversies before the decisi

26、ons are overruled by higher courts.(法官的判決，或者其他某一政治實(shí)體的憲法或法律授權(quán)審理和決 定爭(zhēng)議的官員所做的決定，創(chuàng)設(shè)了判例法。就像“判例法”這個(gè)名稱 所表示的，一個(gè)特定的判決或特定判決的總匯產(chǎn)生了法律一一即普通 適用的原則。普通法系的規(guī)則就在于，己經(jīng)生效的司法裁決在被上級(jí)法院*之前 對(duì)現(xiàn)有的相似爭(zhēng)議的解決有正式和普遍的約束力。)14. To discuss the differences between the binding precedents and persuasive precedent ( by )(談?wù)撘幌戮哂屑s束力的判例和不具有約束力的

27、判例的區(qū)別)Binding precedent is the precedent that a court must follow (it is law). All prior judicial decisions in a specific court，s jurisdiction heard at that courtJ s level or higher are considered to be binding precedent.In contrast, persuasive precedent is precedent that a court need not follow (it

28、 is not law, but as the name suggests, may be persuasive because it suggests a line of reasoning and can be made use of as sources of guidance and justification）. All prior judicial decisions outside of that courts jurisdiction or from a lower court are considered to be persuasive only.（具有約束力的判例是法院必

29、須遵守的（它是法律）。在特定法院 管轄區(qū)范圍內(nèi)的所有同級(jí)或上級(jí)法院先前的司法裁判都是有約束力的 判例。與之相反，不具有約束力的判例指法院不用遵守的判例（它不是 法律，但是如它的名字暗示的，或許有說(shuō)服力，因?yàn)樗峁┝撕侠硇?的準(zhǔn)線，也能作為公平導(dǎo)向的源頭）。所有法院管轄區(qū)之外的先前的 司法裁判或者低級(jí)法院的裁判都只能作為不具有約束力的判例。）15. Do you think it is reasonable to have a dual court system in America?（你認(rèn)為美國(guó)的雙重法律系統(tǒng)合理嗎？）The dual court system is the distincti

30、on of state and federal courts that make up the judicial branch of the government. The federal court includes the district courts of the United States, courts of appeals of the United States and the supreme court of the United States. Among them, the judgment of the Supreme Court is binding. The sta

31、te court includes trial court of inferior jurisdiction, trial court of general jurisdiction and appellate court. The appellate serve to review the decisions of trial courts for errors of law.The reason why it has the dual system is that new states joining the union were assured of limited federal in

32、tervention into local affairs. It meets the need for the state to retain significant legislative authority and judicial autonomy separate from federal control.Because the system is too complex, the efficiency of the it may be slightly inefficiency. However, the pursuit of justice is really fair valu

33、e, not efficiency.（雙重法律制度是指州法院和聯(lián)邦法院組成了政府的法律分支。 聯(lián)邦法院包括聯(lián)邦法院、聯(lián)邦上訴法院、和聯(lián)邦地區(qū)法院，其中聯(lián)邦 法院的判決對(duì)全國(guó)一切法院皆有約束力。州法院系統(tǒng)包括低級(jí)管轄權(quán) 的初審法院，有普通管轄權(quán)的初審法院和上訴法院。上訴法院是為了 復(fù)審初審法院是否有判決的錯(cuò)誤。擁有此體系的原因在于保證新加入的聯(lián)邦的州對(duì)當(dāng)?shù)厥聞?wù)擁有有 限的介入。它既滿足了給予州獨(dú)立于聯(lián)邦的審判權(quán)，又滿足了對(duì)其權(quán) 限的限制。因?yàn)榇讼到y(tǒng)的復(fù)雜性，美國(guó)司法體系的效率在制度設(shè)計(jì)上是略顯 低下的，但司法追求的優(yōu)先價(jià)值確實(shí)是公正，而不是效率。）16. To discuss the diffe

34、rences roles of judge and attorneys in court （by）（法官和律師在法庭上的區(qū)別？）Although powers of judges and rights of attorneys are different in different legal system, judge and attorneys play very different roles in court. First of all, judges have authority to decide questions of law and fact in civil law syst

35、em and only question of law in common law system. Attorneys only have right to show their evidence to convince judges of their opinions, but can t decide cases at last. Second, the status is different. Judges have educational background, judicatory experiences and power to decide cases finally. So j

36、udges are more respectable and get more honor in court. Attorneys are legal practitioner, only can advisejudge and jury how to decide cases. So they are inferior to judges in court.（第一，法官有權(quán)決定法律問(wèn)題，但僅僅是在普通法系中，而律 師只有權(quán)出示證據(jù)去說(shuō)服法卻無(wú)權(quán)決定案例。第二，法官有教育背景, 司法經(jīng)驗(yàn)和最終決定權(quán)，所以法官在法庭上得到更多尊重，而律師是 法律的參與者，只能建議法官判案，所以在法庭上相對(duì)低一等

37、。）17. To discuss whether it is reasonable to choose common people as jurors?（試論選擇普通民眾作為陪審員是否合理）It is reasonable to choose common people as jurors. With the participation of common people, the trial will become more impartial, because it s more difficult to bribe the jurors than the judges. We can av

38、oid the professional prejudice of the judges in the trial, which is formed in the long-term adjudication. It also reflects the democratization in the judicial area. In addition, there are good practices in the western counties.（選擇普通民眾作為陪審員是合理的。普通民眾的參與能讓審判 更合理，原因在于賄賂陪審員要難于賄賂法官。陪審員能避免法官在 長(zhǎng)期審判中形成的職業(yè)偏見(jiàn)，

39、同時(shí)也能反應(yīng)司法領(lǐng)域的民主化。另外, 在西方國(guó)家，此項(xiàng)制度得到了很好的實(shí)踐。）18. Please discuss the meaning of the right of judicial review of the court?（試論述法院司法審查權(quán)的意義。）The ability of the courts to interpret the Constitution was decided early in the history of the United States, in the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison. It is the power of

40、 the courtto examine legislation and other acts of congress and to decide their constitutionality.Without judicial review the Constitution would be nothing but a piece of paper. The Constitution states that it is the supreme law of the land. There has to be an authority to decide whether a particula

41、r law is constitutional or unconstitutional. If not, then the legislative branch woulditsalways included the gives the Judicial the Constitution, the Constitutionbe free to pass any law without regard to constitutionality. Judicial authority has power to interpret laws. The Constitution branch power over all cases arising under The courts must be able to interpret both and laws and to determine whether one prohibits the other, checks and balances 權(quán)力制衡protection to human rights 人權(quán)保護(hù)(法院對(duì)憲法