LESSON 2. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENT

abolitionist

acupuncture

affray

aiding and abetting

armed robbery

arson

assault

attempted murder

battery

blackmail

bomb hoax

breach of the Official Secrets Act

buck a trend

burglary

capital crime

child abandonment

child abuse

coddling

community Service

compensate victims for

contempt of Court

counterfeiting notes and coins

criminal damage

criminal negligence

death-row inmates

defraud

deterrent

diversion

domestic violence

drug trafficking

embezzlement

enact a law

espionage

execution

expiation

extortion

felony

first-time offender

forgery

fraud

good time credits

hamstrung

hijacking

hostage-taking

identity theft

impose a fine

incarceration

indeterminate sentence

indictable offence

indiscriminate application

infraction

kidnapping

latitude

law enforcement officials

leeway

legal constraints

life in prison

manslaughter

misdemeanor

mugging

murder

obscenity

obstruction of justice

parking offence

penitentiary

perjury

person crime

petty crime

possession of a firearm

possession of firearm

principal rationales

probation

property crimes

public order offence

repeal

repeat offender

restitution

retentionist

retribution

revamp

riot

road traffic offences

robbery

sedition

sentencing guidelines

shoplifting

slander and libel

slap on the wrist,

small-time criminal

solicitation

stand by

statutory rape

stiffen sentences

stirring up racial hatred

summary offence

suspended sentence

tack on

theft

treason

uproar

unleash criminals

vehicular manslaughter

violent disorder

wacky

LESSON 3. LAW AND THE INTERNET

 apathy

 armchair (adj.)

 assault

 balk at smth.

 bogus company

 bottom line

 card and bank fraud

 car immobilizer

 CCTV

 charity fraud con (n.)

 child abuse

 crack into a system

 crime rate

 criminologist

 cyber terrorism

 cybercrime

 cyberextortion

 cyberlaw

 cyber-security

 cyberstalking

 cyberwarfare

 dating fraud

 “debut” crime

 deploy (v.)

 disseminate (v.)

 espionage

 extortion

 fake friend-request

 fall in line with

 financial scam

 fraud

 fraudster

 hack (v.)

 hacker

 harassment

 heyday

 house alarm

 identity theft   infringement of privacy

internet marketing and retail fraud

 keep cyberattacks quiet

 keep pace with smth./smb.

 law-enforcement agency

 legal grey area

 mitigate (v.)

 murky

 nuts and bolts

 on the up and up

 online abuse

 paucity

 perpetrator

 phishing

 piracy

 pirated software

 pit smth./smb. against   smth./smb.

 plummet

 purchase fraud

 reputation damage

 rife (adj.)

 run rampant

 saturated with smth.

 security breach

 security vulnerbilities 

 slick

 social engineering

 spammer

 tangible offence

 teeth-gnashing

 tweak oneself

 unauthorized access

 unauthorized music   downloading

 underreporting

 unsolicited

 virus

 wickedness

 "work-at-home" scams

LESSON 4. ETHICAL ASPECTS OF LAW

active euthanasia

affordable

archive (v.)

at a gut level

attempted murder

bar from using smth.

blurry

computer geek

confluence

contentious

deliberate euthanasia

facile

gain statutory/case support

harassment litigation

inalienable rights

intrusion

inure smb. to smth.

invasive scrutiny

killer app

landmark ruling

liability

liable for murder

manslaughter

murder by poisoning

nascent debate

numb smb. to smth.

outweigh (v.)

passive euthanasia

plaintiff

pop up (v.)

pressure cooker

privacy

revolve around smth.

scattershot

set up a legal architecture

statutory

sue (v.)

surveillance

tailored to smth.

third-party companies

transgression

treasure trove

treat shabbily

trumped by

user-appropriate advertising

voluntary euthanasia

withdraw life support

Appendix 5

CASES FOR MOCK TRIALS

A mock trial is a simulated proceeding conducted by students to understand trial rules and processes. Mock trials have proven to be an effective learning tool for students of all grade levels. It helps them understand the law, practice critical thinking, and gain greater confidence with public speaking by assuming the roles of attorneys and witnesses in a fictional criminal or civil trial.

TASK: Choose one of the cases and have a mock trial in your group. As an alternative you can find information about a highly publicised case and act it out.

1. Friends Reunited User Pays Damages

A former teacher has won a pay-out over libelous remarks made in a "virtual conversation". Jim Murray, 68, successfully sued a former pupil for libel over comments made on the internet. He began court action against Jonathan Spencer, who has been ordered to pay ₤1,250 damages and ₤150 costs, after reading insults about himself on the Friends Reunited website.

The popular but controversial site aims to bring former classmates back together and give them a worldwide forum to discuss their school days.

Mr Spencer had posted messages claiming Mr Murray had been sacked after "making rude remarks about girls" and "strangling" a pupil.

Friends Reunited removed the comments after Mr Murray revealed he had retired from his job and the claims were untrue.

Mr Murray described the award as "peanuts". The former languages teacher said: "The issue is the evil of this website. "They are effectively putting a dagger in people's hands. "When challenged they simply say they have removed the dagger - the wound is still there. "This has been a fight for my good name against a giant like Friends Reunited. "If the judge had awarded me Ј5,000 the judiciary would have thought that was opening the floodgates to this sort of case. "So instead I was given derisory damages and that way people will be put off by the cost and trouble they have to go to to clear their name. "Mr Spencer has opened a can of worms. "He has brought disgrace on himself, his family and his school. "I am pressing his education authority to do something about him."

Mr Murray represented himself in the libel action at Lincoln County Court. He had already rejected cash offers of Ј400 and later Ј1,000, and a written apology from Mr Spencer. Mr Murray, who taught at Ridgewood Comprehensive, Doncaster, South Yorkshire, until 1983, had learned about his ex-pupil's comments from friends.

Mr Spencer - now himself a teacher at a school in Gateshead, Tyne and Wear - admitted the insults were libelous but claimed damages should be nominal. He said Friends Reunited had only carried them for a day and they would have been seen by very few people.

But District Judge Andrew Maw said Mr Murray had a right to feel aggrieved. The judge said the proceedings were "difficult and novel" and that no-one had been able to find any relevant cases preceding it.