Complete the sentences using proper words in the box.
possession, burglary, bigamy, alcohol, marriage, manslaughter, conspirators, adultery, intent, "hit-and-run"
1. Depending upon the circumstances, vehicular homicide may constitute voluntary … or even murder.
2. Driving while under the influence of … can itself be an offense.
3. If a driver involved in a car accident, fails to stop and identify himself he can be accused of committing a so-called … offense.
4. An existing valid … is an essential clement of the crime of bigamy.
5. After the second marriage has been performed the crime of … is complete.
6. If both lovers are married, they may be both accused of the offense of ….
7.Breaking a dwelling and entering it with the intention of committing a crime constitutes a crime of ….
8. … of burglar's tools makes a distinct criminal offense.
9. The guilt of the … does not depend upon the realization of their plans.
10. A criminal … existing in the minds of at least two persons is essential to the crime of conspiracy.
6. Match the synonyms:
| 1) recognize
|| a) vehicles
| 2) spouse
|| b) living
| 3) willful
|| c) have
| 4) cars
|| d) isolated
| 5) murder
|| e) occur
| 6) take place
|| f) wife
| 7) subsequent
|| g) motorist
| 8) driver
|| h) next
| 9) alive
|| i) identify
| 10) separate
|| j) slaughter
| 11) possess
|| k) guilty
| 12) culpable
|| l) damage
| 13) injury
|| m) controlled substances
| 14) drugs
|| n) voluntary
7. Match the antonyms:
| 1) yell
|| a) creation
| 2) guilt
|| b) the same
| 3) loud
|| c) personal
| 4) offensive
|| d) disturbance
| 5) often
|| e) success
| 6) open
|| f) public
| 7) overt
|| g) improper
| 8) private
|| h) closed
| 9) proper
|| i) defensive
| 10) tranquility
|| j) innocence
| 11) various
|| k) succeed
| 12) failure
|| l) quiet
| 13) fail
|| m) nighttime
| 14) entrance
|| n) exit
| 15) destruction
|| o) seldom
| 16) daytime
|| p) whisper
| 17) common
|| q) covert
Answer the questions.
1. Why does vehicular homicide usually occur?
2. What causes dangerous driving?
3. What kind of offense does so-called "hit-and-run" constitute?
1. What kind of marriage may constitute bigamy?
2. When is the crime of bigamy completed?
3. Is cohabitation generally necessary to fix the guilt of a defendant accused of bigamy?
1. What criminal offences are referred to as burglary?
2. What is an essential element of the crime of burglary?
3. Why is not execution of the intent necessary to complete the crime?
4. What securities against intrusion do you know?
5. Is breaking an essential element to establish the offense of burglary?
6. What are the main differences between the common law and the criminal law with respect to burglary?
7. How do most statutes qualify the possession of burglar’s tools?
Say if the following statements are true or false. Comment on the true statements and correct the false ones.
1. The reckless operation of a motor vehicle may result in voluntary manslaughter.
2. Certain degrees of alcoholic intoxication do not exceed statutory limits.
3. If a driver involved in a car accident stops and identifies himself, he will be accused of a so-called "hit-and-run" crime.
4. Unmarried lovers can also be accused of adultery.
5. A valid existing marriage cannot be the foundation of a prosecution for bigamy.
6. When the second marriage is performed the crime of bigamy is incomplete.
7. A second marriage is sometimes not bigamous under some statutes.
8. Breaking and entering a motor vehicle does not constitute the crime of burglary.
9. According to the common law burglary can only take place in nighttime
10. In a number of jurisdictions burglary can take place both in daytime and in nighttime.
11. The guilt of the conspirators depends solely on the success of their enterprise.
12. The innocence of the conspirators does not depend upon the failure of their enterprise.
10. Speak on the “hit-and-run” offense. Use the following words and phrases:
- the negligent and reckless operation;
- to operate (drive) a motor vehicle;
- to prosecute as a separate offense;
- to constitute voluntary manslaughter;
- to inflict personal injury;
- under the influence of a controlled substance;
- to fail to stop and identify himself/herself.
11. Describe a typical “burglary” offense. Use the following words and phrases:
- intention of committing an intrusion;
- to steal something;
- to cover only a dwelling;
- some statutory provisions;
- a degree of force;
- to effect an entrance;
- to constitute a sufficient breaking;
- to take place in daytime;
- to embrace a motor vehicle;
- to contemplate only nighttime;
- to make a distinct criminal offense.
Divide the texts “Bigamy” and “Burglary” into logical parts and entitle each of them.
13. Work in pairs:
a) Look at the following words and phrases and think of a story that might combine them all. You may reorder them in any way you want to using any form of the verb:
- an overt act;
- the guilt does not depend upon the success or failure of your enterprise;
- this agreement amounts to a conspiracy;
- he is equally culpable;
- she refused to join us, so she is not guilty.
B) When you have decided upon the story, tell it to your partner. Then listen to that of your partner. Ask each other as many questions as you can to learn further details or clarify some points.
Give a summary of the text.
Speak individually or arrange a discussion on the following.
· An existing marriage is indeed an essential element of bigamy.
· The crime of bigamy is only complete when the second marriage is performed.
· I think burglary can take place both in day- and nighttime.
Scrutinize the situation and provide detailed and motivated answers to the questions given below.
Identify key points in the article and extract information from it to pass on to somebody else.
CONSPIRACY IN MEMPHIS
The shape of important events usually becomes dearer with the passage of time – unless, that is, the conspiracy theorists have a say in the matter. On December 8th, a Memphis jury ruled that the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968 was the work not of James Earl Ray, who was charged with it, but of an elaborate network of Memphis businessmen, mobsters and government agencies.
The verdict ended a month-long wrongful-death civil lawsuit brought by the King family, who have long subscribed to conspiracy theories about the death of the civil-rights leader. Officially, the defendant in the case was Loyd Jowers, a Memphis bar owner who, the plaintiffs alleged, hired a hit man to kill King. Yet the real targets of William Pepper, a lawyer for the King family, were the CIA, the Green Berets,
British and Canadian intelligence, and defence contractors.
Mr Pepper argued that King became a threat to all these groups when he began opposing the Vietnam war, and therefore they conspired with Mr Jowers to have him killed. During his closing arguments, Mr Pepper even argued that the media have perpetuated the myth that Ray killed King because most of the media are ClA-controlled.
Most lawyers have dismissed the entire case as a fraud, arguing that only an apathetic Judge (who often dozed off during the proceedings) saved it from being thrown out of court. Yet members of the King family praised the verdict for bringing a conclusion to the family's 30-year search for the “truth” about the Memphis assassination. Dexter King, one of King's sons, said in a post-trial press conference that the plot to kill his father was “the most incredible cover-up of the century”.
The family aligned itself with Mr Pepper after he published “Orders to Kill,” a 1998 conspiracy tract that prompted Dexter King to visit Ray in prison for a televised reconciliation. (Ray died there last year, insisting to the end that he had been framed). According to David Garrow, who wrote a Pulitzer prize-winning biography of King, the conspiracy theories fill an emotional need of his family and friends to explain the assassination as something larger than the act of one madman. Coretta Scott King, his widow, has persuaded the Justice Department to investigate several of the conspiracy angles. Yet few people believe that this (or the verdict in the civil trial) will result in any new criminal charges.
Nevertheless, a Hollywood account of the assassination may soon be playing at a cinema near you. The King family has sold the film rights to Oliver Stone, the man who once involved the CIA, the FBI and the whole military-industrial complex – plus Lyndon Johnson – in the murder of President Kennedy. One shudders to think what he will do with the King case .
1. Who was Martin Luther King?
2. Why was he killed?
3. Was he really killed by James Earl Ray?
4. Why have most layers dismissed the entire case as a fraud?
5. Was there really a plot to kill Martin Luther King?
6. Why have the King family subscribed to conspiracy theories?
7. Do you think the assassination was something larger than the act of one madman?
FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL…