LEV3701 Multiple Choice Questions With Answers (Set 1) PDF

Preview

Summary

This document contains multiple choice questions with answers....

Description

Question 1 In terms of South African law, the law of evidence forms part of … (1) substantive law. (2) procedural or adjective law.✓ (3) criminal procedural law. (4) common-law.

Questionthe 2 correct statement: Section 35(2) of the Constitution provides for the rights Identify of a detained person, including … (1) the right to choose, and to consult with a legal practitioner, and to be informed of this right promptly(s 35(2)(b)).✓ (2) the right to be informed of the charge with suf cient details to answer it (s 35(3) (a)). (3) the right to be presumed innocent, to remain silent during the plea proceedings as well as during the trial, and not to testify during the trial (s35(3)(h)).

(4) the right to to adduce and challenge evidence and not to be a compellable witness against himself or herself (s 35(3)(i) and (j)).

Question 3 Consider the following statements, and choose the correct option: (1) The party who undertakes examination-in-chief can attack the credibility of an unfavourable witness. (2) Examination-in-chief is undertaken by the presiding of cer in his capacity as “chief” of the court. (3) Refreshing of memory by a witness can only take place before such a witness starts giving evidence in court.

(4) If a witness gives unfavourable evidence, the party who called such a witness may present evidence which contradicts the witness.✓

Question 4 X and Y are accused of removing Y’s son from the custody of his estranged wife (W) and kidnapping him to an unknown destination. W was an eyewitness to the kidnapping. Consider the following statements, and choose the correct option:

(1) Y can compel W to testify on his behalf.✓ (2) X can compel W to testify on his behalf. (3) Y can compel X to testify in defence of Y. (4) X can compel Y to testify in defence of X.

Question 5 Consider the following statements, and choose the correct option: (1) Evidence about footprints require an explanation by an expert and the court is obliged to accept the opinion of an expert about the identity of the footprints.

(2) Handwriting identif cation is done by an expert and the court is obliged to follow the opinion of an expert about the handwriting. The court may therefore not hear lay evidence or draw its own conclusions about it. (3) The evidence given by a fingerprint expert on fingerprints found at the scene of the crime is classif ed as expert evidence.✓ (4) When fingerprints are used, an enlargement of the accused’s fingerprint is compared in court with that of a fingerprint found at the scene of the crime. If seven points of similarity are found, this will usually amount to proof on a preponderance of probabilities that the same person made the two sets of prints.

Question 6

Consider the following statements, and choose the correct option: (1) Evidence which intends to prove the content of a document will be hearsay evidence.✓ (2) Evidence derived from pocket calculators is free from human intervention and is therefore considered to be documentary evidence. (3) If the content of a document must be proved, secondary evidence will sometimes be accepted, but it must always be in a written form. (4) At common law, public documents are admissible to prove the truth of what they contain. This means that they are treated as an exception to the rule against the admissibility of previous consistent statements.

Question 7 In S v Ndiki and Others [2007] 2 All SA 185 (Ck) it is explained that if a computer printout contains a statement of which a person has knowledge, and which is stored in the computer’s memory, its use in evidence depends upon the credibility of an identif able person. It would therefore constitute … (1) hearsay evidence.✓ (2) real evidence. (3) evidence of uncertain classif cation. (4) documentary evidence.

Question 8 Consider the following statements about the relevance and admissibility of evidence, and choose the correct statement: (1) During a trial, the court must f rst consider the competency of a witness, then the admissibility of evidence, and finally the weight or persuasive value of evidence. The “weight” of evidence therefore plays no part when the court considers the admissibility of that evidence. (2) Irrelevant evidence will never be admissible, but relevant evidence will always be admissible.

(3) A finding by a court that a piece of evidence is inadmissible due to irrelevance is f nal and cannot be reconsidered during the same trial. (4) Facts relevant to the facts in issue may become in issue themselves. An example would be the reliability of a witness.✓

Question 9 Jack is accused of raping a fellow student. During cross-examination of the victim, it is put to her that she is lying about the identify of the accused. To establish the victim's credibility, the prosecutor calls her roommate to testify that the complainant told her a similar story. The roommate’s evidence will be …

(1) hearsay. (2) evidence about a previous consistent statement.✓ (3) similar fact evidence. (4) character evidence.

Question 10 In the case of an alleged of ence of a sexual nature, evidence of a previous consistent statement will inter alia be admissible if the complaint was made…

(1) at the first reasonable opportunity, but not later than 48 hours after the offence was committed. (2) at the first reasonable opportunity, but not later than 24 hours after the offence was committed. (3) at the first reasonable opportunity, but not later than 12 hours after the offence was committed. (4) at the first reasonable opportunity, and this could be weeks later, depending on the circumstances of each individual case.✓...