The marking scheme for this question says:
"Provides a clear description of the criminal process through a detailed
sequencing of steps which may be taken to bring John and Sue’s matter
to a conclusion"
So basically you are providing a simple outline of the various steps that would be taken as they go through the justice system.
Have a look at the syllabus, under the Crime Section. It details in dot points each of the steps. Assess which are relevant to John and sue, and provide reasons why. Thats all you need to do
¥ the criminal process and the role of discretion
Ð reporting crime
Ð investigation, arrest and charge
Ð bail
Ð plea, hearing (evidence, procedure, including the role of juries)
Ð appeals
Ð personnel (police, prosecutors, defence lawyers, magistrates, judges)
The markers notes may also help you:
(c) The best answers to this part were concise and recognised alternative paths — for example,
that bail may or may not be granted, and that there could be a guilty or not guilty plea entered.
It was noteworthy that the best responses did not assume the offence with which John and Sue
were being charged, but recognised that as warrants had been issued and extradition indicated,
the offence had to be an indictable criminal offence which would probably be heard in the
Supreme Court. Many raised the Drug Court as an option without realising that it is unlikely
to be used for a serious offence such as trafficking. Some candidates used diagrams which
met the sequencing requirement but not the required descriptive component. Many candidates
simply listed process stages. Again, candidates needed to be familiar with the glossary term
‘describe’.
