WDW101Y1 Lecture : Lecture 1 Jan 12th 2012 WDW325H1 Professor Breese-Davies

82 views3 pages

goldweasel130

26 Jan 2012

School

UTSG

Department

Woodsworth College Courses

Course

WDW101Y1

Professor

David Davies

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Overview of the criminal procedure: key players in the system, key features of the system. Police investigate crime -> the police have a huge amount of power, they investigate the entire case and gather the evidence. They also decide whether to lay charges or not. Crown attorney present prosecution case -> in ontario, they play no role in the laying of the charges. However, they decide whether to prosecute and how to prosecute. They have the power to withdraw charges if they feel there is not enough evidence. They also have the power to negotiate plea bargains. > they attempt to prevent the crown from proving beyond a reasonable doubt. Or present a formal defense (provocation, self-defence, etc). Defendant -> can represent themselves, otherwise have a defence counsel and they are relatively silent throughout the process. Judge / jury -> jury decides the facts and what they think happened, and they decide guilt or innocence.

Related Questions

Write a 3-page paper based on your the Exotic Embezzlement case addressing the following: Use the readings and the fraud examination checklist to address the following questions:

1. What sections of the fraud examination checklist were most helpful to the investigation and why? Please be specific in the way the techniques you used based on the checklist will contribute to the overall investigation.

2. Identify the specific direct & circumstantial evidence used to support a prosecution of this case.

3. Identify the anomalies and red flags of fraud present at the business

4. Could this fraud have been prevented or deterred?

Paul and Elder (2009) have defined critical thinking as: the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it. The authors describe eight Elements of Thought involved in critical thinking:

Purpose (all reasoning has a purpose â goals, objectives)

Question at issue

Assumptions (presuppositions, axioms, line of reasoning, information taken for granted)

Point of View

Information (data, evidence)

Concepts and Theories

Interpretation and Inference (conclusions, solutions)

Implications and Consequences

When defining a subject, Nosich (2012) believes it starts with a âfundamental and powerful conceptâ.

The fundamental and powerful concept of Auditing is âInvestigationâ.

Auditing involves an analysis (or an âinvestigationâ) of the financial statements in order to issue an opinion of whether they are presented fairly in accordance with appropriate standards.

Required: In several paragraphs, answer the following questions.

âInternal Controlsâ are discussed throughout the Auditing course. We will examine various methods of âinvestigatingâ internal controls in order to understand the important role that they play in the Auditing process. Even though it is the very beginning of the course, it is important that you start to form your own definition of internal control. Answer the questions in the prompts below to help you define and describe internal control:

The assumptions of internal control are that in order for a business process to be effective, there must be separation of duties among authorization, custody and recording of transactions. How are those controls put in place in the Sales / Accounts receivable process? To answer this question, discuss how each of those components occurs in each of the following areas (rely on your own experience as a customer and/or the rules of accounting that you already know about how a sales / accounts receivable transaction is supposed to work):

The sale

Shipping

Billing

Collection

As the auditor, how would you determine whether the process is working correctly?

What actions or events would occur if you assume the process is working correctly when it is not?

What actions or events would occur if you assume the process is not working correctly when it is actually doing so?

taupetrout471

1. Suspicious that marijuana was being grown in eventual defendant DK's home, federal agents used a thermal imaging device to scan his home from a public street. The agents sought to determine whether the amount of heat emanating from the home (which was part of a triplex) was consistent with the amount emanated from high-intensity lamps typically used for indoor marijuana growth. The scan showed that the roof and a side wall were relatively hot compared with the rest of the home and substantially warmer than the neighboring units. Based in part on the thermal imaging results, a federal magistrate judge issued a warrant to search the home, where the agents found marijuana growing. After being indicted on a federal drug charge, DK unsuccessfully moved to suppress the evidence seized from his home. He then entered a conditional guilty plea under which, on appeal, he could challenge the use of the thermal imaging device and the validity of the resulting warrant. The government took the position that the use of the device, when operated from a public street, was not a search for purposes of the Fourth Amendment and that DK, therefore, did not have a basis for his Fourth Amendment-based challenge. Was the government correct in this argument?

2. Mann was the attorney for the Town of Rye, a New York community. He filed a defamation lawsuit against a newspaper that served the Rye area and against the writer of that newspaper's Town Crier column. Mann based his case on statements that appeared in the column. The writer of the column referred to Mann as a "political hatchet man" and as "one of the biggest powers behind the throne in local government". The writer also asserted that "Mann pulls the strings" and raised the question of whether Mann was "leading the Town of Rye to destruction." What arguments should the defendants make to avoid defamation liability? Should Mann win his case?

Thanks! need a good start on these

ochreferret730

WDW101Y1 Lecture : Lecture 1 Jan 12th 2012 WDW325H1 Professor Breese-Davies

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

WDW101Y1 Lecture Notes - Controlled Drugs And Substances Act, Hybrid Offence, Narcotic Control Act

WDW101Y1 Lecture : January 13 Lecture

WDW101Y1 Lecture Notes - Ultra Vires, De Minimis, Mattress

Related Questions