Vlad Case Study - Murder Case - Essay Writing Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task:

The “facts” of the case Vlad was found dead in the middle of a suburban street in 64 Brycemore, a [fictitious] town in New South Wales. Vlad appears to have been hit by a car travelling at high speed, which then reversed over his body after hitting him Vlad was seen alive around 10 PM the night before, leaving the 68 Brycemore Lawn Bowls Club (just after bingo finished). Vlad was found dead two streets away just after 5 AM by a jogger. Otherwise, the time and other circumstances of Vlad’s death are not known with certainty.

72 Heavy rain had fallen from around 11 PM until 3 AM, according to Bureau of Meteorology records for the region.

Leo has been charged with the murder, or alternatively the manslaughter, of Vlad, based on the following evidence outlined 76 below.

Leo has claimed his right to silence and declines to make any statement to police or to testify in court.

Q.1: Jessica (A)

80 Leo’s wife Jessica would, if called as a witness, testify:

• that Leo left the house “around 6 PM” on the night of Vlad’s death, after he got home from work, to do the weekly grocery shopping for their household while she stayed at 84 home minding their baby daughter;

• that Leo returned “about a minute or two after 10 PM – I know that for sure because Homeland had just finished on the TV”; and

• that Leo “wasn’t very talkative, but that’s usual for him. He just unpacked the groceries, then had a shower and went to bed.

Leo’s house is four blocks east of the Brycemore Lawn Bowls Club 92 premises. Vlad’s apartment is five streets north of the Brycemore Lawn Bowls Club, and three blocks from where he was found dead. The Seven-Eleven store is six streets north-east of the Brycemore 96 Lawn Bowls Club. Jessica is unwilling to testify against her own husband. Can she object to giving any part(s) of the above testimony? On what ground(s)?

Q.2: Jessica (B)

Jessica would also testify that, when she got up the next morning, Leo had already left for work” She started to suspect something was up. She checked the browser history on their computer and found 104 that starting at 4 AM a user had run numerous searches for the terms “LAWYERS + BRYCEMORE,” and clicked on a number of webpages for local barristers and solicitors, including that of your firm. Jessica and Leo are the only persons living in their house, other than their 108 baby, and the computer is protected with a password only they know.

Again, Jessica is unwilling to testify against Leo. Can she object to giving any part(s) of the above testimony? On what ground(s)? 112 The prosecution want to inspect the computer but neither Jessica nor Leo will reveal the password. Is there any lawful way for the prosecution to access the information on the computer?

Q.3: Jessica (C)

116 Jessica tells Leo that she has planned for some time to separate from him, and eventually to divorce. If she can gain primary custody of their daughter, she plans to return to Perth to live near her parents. However, she still “wishes Leo well” and does “not want to help the 120 police frame the father of my child for a killing he did not commit.” Can Jessica and/or Leo prevent Jessica being compelled to give any part(s) of the testimony outlined in Q.1 and Q.2? On what ground(s)?

Q.4: Sharni

124 Sharni, age 13, was working on the cash register at her parents’ corner store two blocks from Leo’s home on the night Vlad died. Interviewed in her home eight days afterwards, she tells police that around 9 PM, “some old guy” came in, looking “really shaken, like 128 he’d seen a ghost,” and purchased three three-litre bottles of methylated spirits. He first took out his credit card to pay, then “seemed to change his mind,” and reached into his wallet to get cash instead. He “turned his wallet inside out, even emptied it onto the 132 counter,” but didn’t have enough cash to pay for all three bottles, so he put one back.

Leo has refused to take part in a “live” ID parade but the police show Sharni a folder containing photographs of Leo and of 35 other adult 136 males close to him in age, sex and skin/ hair colour. Sharni chooses Leo and 3 of the others, saying “I, like, think it was one of those four. Definitely. – But not sure which one of them.”

The police want Sharni to testify but she is unwilling because “I’m 140 too young, aren’t I? I mean, I’m not supposed to be working the counter after 6 PM – I just filled in for, like, literally only 10 minutes maximum that night because Dad had to take a toilet break and Mum was at home feeling sick. I don’t want to get in trouble for that 144 one time.”

Sharni’s mother, who was sitting in, ended the interview at that point and asked the police to leave.

Is Sharni competent to testify?

148 If Sharni is competent, can she be compelled to testify against her wishes?

If Sharni does testify, are all of her above statements admissible?

Which if any are inadmissible? Why?

152 If Sharni is excused from testifying, can the police still adduce their record of the interview as evidence in court?

This Law Assignment has been solved by our Law Experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.

Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.