CASE STUDY- “Its not yours until you pay”
Weighing 40% Due 13th on May CASE STUDY.

Using the Judicial Commission of New South Wales Website, identify the proofs of Larceny (Theft). NSW Crimes Act 40/1900 117 (Case Study on Larceny to be provided on vUWS).
Are these proofs able to be satisfied in the issues that arise in the case study.

Please note that the Case Study link for Assessment 3 Please access the Case Study via the below link

http://ezproxy.uws.edu.au/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/364831764/2DC15C38D5AD4C39PQ/1?accountid=36155

**** MUST PROVIDE ANOTHER FIVE ACADEMIC SOURCES ***

2. Using the Case Study “Its not yours until you pay”, explain how police must apply LEPRA if they intend to question, search, arrest or caution a suspect.
3. Identify the alternatives that are available to police when dealing with the issues in this Case Study. Arrest or Caution or Summons or Court Attendance Notice or Unofficial Caution.
Remember this assessment is not an integrity test its about the most appropriate way to deal with the issues of alleged theft that arise in the Case Study. You choose how you want to deal with the
matter and use the appropriate LEPRA and Rule of Law criteria.

4. Reflect on the police action and present any alternatives to arresting and charging.

5. Quotes and sources must be referenced appropriately. A minimum of five references properly used are required to pass this assessment.

MARKING CRITERIA.

Fully answers assessment question. Well researched with a consistent logical and flowing style of writing. Shows a good basic understanding of the assessment criteria and adequately expresses their own ideas. Referenced well with (minimum of six refs). Adequate writing skills.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CASE STUDY- “Its not yours until you pay”
Weighing 40% Due 13th on May CASE STUDY.

Using the Judicial Commission of New South Wales Website, identify the proofs of Larceny (Theft). NSW Crimes Act 40/1900 117 (Case Study on Larceny to be provided on vUWS).
Are these proofs able to be satisfied in the issues that arise in the case study.

Please note that the Case Study link for Assessment 3 Please access the Case Study via the below link

http://ezproxy.uws.edu.au/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/364831764/2DC15C38D5AD4C39PQ/1?accountid=36155

**** MUST PROVIDE ANOTHER FIVE ACADEMIC SOURCES ***

2. Using the Case Study “Its not yours until you pay”, explain how police must apply LEPRA if they intend to question, search, arrest or caution a suspect.
3. Identify the alternatives that are available to police when dealing with the issues in this Case Study. Arrest or Caution or Summons or Court Attendance Notice or Unofficial Caution.
Remember this assessment is not an integrity test its about the most appropriate way to deal with the issues of alleged theft that arise in the Case Study. You choose how you want to deal with the
matter and use the appropriate LEPRA and Rule of Law criteria.

4. Reflect on the police action and present any alternatives to arresting and charging.

5. Quotes and sources must be referenced appropriately. A minimum of five references properly used are required to pass this assessment.

MARKING CRITERIA.

Fully answers assessment question. Well researched with a consistent logical and flowing style of writing. Shows a good basic understanding of the assessment criteria and adequately expresses their own ideas. Referenced well with (minimum of six refs). Adequate writing skills.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *