Update Jun 11th

 I've been plugging along, nothing really exciting. I did have the opportunity to help with the University of Toronto Indexing group. I am waiting to get the indexes and summaries from that. I have gotten through a couple of topics. I am on criminal law now.

One of the interesting things that a lecturer for Emonds said was that the LSO is looking for you to be able to show that you are competent to practise law. That's why a lot of questions have to do with exceptions, dates, ethics, formulas.

This is really apparent in the differences in the material for the bar between criminal law in the U.S. and Canada. In the U.S. the questions are like 

At a defendant’s trial for robbery, the defendant called a witness who testified that he and the defendant were camping in a state park on the night in question.  On cross-examination, the prosecutor asked the witness if it is true that the witness forged his former manager’s signature to gain access to a company expense account.  The witness denied forging the signature.  The prosecutor now seeks to question the witness about the 30-day suspension that he received after company officials determined that he had forged the manager’s signature.

Is the prosecutor’s proposed question proper?

  1. No, because a party may not reference the consequences of a bad act denied by a witness.
  2. No, because the question exceeds the proper scope of cross-examination.
  3. Yes, to impeach the witness on a collateral issue.
  4. Yes, to rebut the witness’s denial of the forgery.
The Criminal section of the LSO material starts off with like 

The maximum penalty for summary conviction offences is (s 787(1))2 Years Less a Day in Prison; AND/OR. 6 Months, IF offence alleged Before September 19, 2019 $5,000


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Update May 19th

Finally Finished Printing Material

June 21 - Real Estate Stuff