Search results

woohoo!!! yeah! all done and handed in. and with three minutes to spare! so much cruisier than normal!! thank you both for ur marvelous company - hope u both get hds and shiny medals until next time xx

I’m a bit concerned about the cautioning bit – if they caution her once under that doesn’t that cover all the interviews?

hehe and that wordcount thing would have been a very pleasant surprise in my case - i so need the extra words! only 1600 so far :(

i'm not using footnotes i don't think u have to with this one - i'm just hey just remembering an earlier post of urs - did u say the custody officer didn't caution her appropriately?

fun! did u end up mentioning dishonest acquisition? i still haven't gotten around to including that yet... i proabably will tho - i need the words!

yay you're still online i was worried u and iwr had run off to party since u've both pretty much finished

i'm having trouble expanding my procedure section - its only 400 words. i've mentioned williams, and crapped on about how they shouldn't have interviewed her for more than 4 hours. i've talked about the arrest. what else is there?!

i don't think u can p.1136 says they'd get done for an offence of dishonesty under s179 of the crimes act damn u guys and ur done essays! i'm up to 1200 oh dear, a while to go yet

night guys i'm going to take myself off to bed and get up early to do this hope it gets done... still under the 1000 word mark...

but where is that table from?

yes. yes! BRILLIANT hahahhahahhehehe i've had WAY too much caffine

I get confused on that bit - the book seems to randomly spit out a 'traffickable quantities' section on p.1137 but i don't know how to reference it or where it comes from. then it says the current amounts are in sch1 of the DMT(amendment)A (the amounts and penalties for this are on p.1139). i...

dammit! there goes my whole 'possession' section!

hey can possession be tried by indictment or only summarily? cause i know they'd prolly charge her with supply (and i know the penalties and such for that) but with that quantity could they still charge her with possession? and with possession, is there only the summary offence available with 2...

it's ok - dib confirmed he kaw teh as authority for mens rea for DMTA - says so on p.1128 towards the end of the page

filippetti gave consent didn't he? i'm not sure about the fraud thing - i'm going to look at it later if i have time. i'm just not sure what to do about that one! or search!

hehe they even called the cops to ask - and the cops said it was illegal - but we can't find the relevant case law and legislation

i'm not going too bad - i've written about 600 words... should really get a move on still languishing in my substantive area - once i work out wat i want to say i always have trouble convincing myself to write it! hmmm.... i've still got a little bit to go on evidential readings... but i see...

i took it as an either/or thing - as in she could be charged with dishonest acquisition but could also be charged with supply since it's a deemed drug - maybe i'm wrong tho still not sure wat i'm gonna do about that one! after this exam i've got accg105 on friday, then the following monday...

i think for the customs thing it's not that she imported them, its that the drugs she has are presumed to be imports... but i don't think i'll worry about it - even if charges under that act are possible, it would be more attractive for them to use the state legislation. plus if anne said...