Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Good Luck in the Kings Inns Entrance Exams

Options
  • 20-08-2006 9:30pm
    #1
    dermot_sheehan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭


    Good luck to everyone doing the Kings Inns entrance exams tomorrow.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,713 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    Yes, good luck to everyone!

    (Thread title changed slightly gabhain!)


  • Options
    #3
    RDMH
    Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭RDMH


    After the curve ball that was thrown in the Evidence exam today I think a lot of people will really some luck. Question 1 was, for the first time, not on unconstitutionally obtained evidence and the O'Brien Rule, that was question 2. I know a lot of people who would have expected it to be number 1 and hinged thier hopes on passing the exam on this (as question 1 carries 50% of the overall marks). Thankfully what was asked in question 1 was an area that I covered so hopefully enough done (fingers crossed)


  • Options
    #4
    cramming
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24 ✭cramming


    I was one of those ppl hinging my hopes of passing on question one! What exactly was question one about....! I threw in a lot of BS arguments with a bit of a foundation in opinion evidence, sacredotial privilege.... little bit of corroboration, i had to resort to arguing relevancy!!!.... my best guess was it hinged on hearsay?? a topic i hadn't studied. Aghh the pressure is seriously on now!!!!

    Where were the questions on legal professional or public interest immunity, corroboration, opinon evidence, similar fact, s 1(f).... etc...??? I think it was a really harsh paper!


  • Options
    #5
    dermot_sheehan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭dermot_sheehan


    I was downstairs in room 5 if anyone was there. Question 1 was surprising, but in the little cramming i did since finishing my masters last week i thankfully covered evidence by children. There was also I think alot of hearsay, a bit of doctrine of recent complaint and how thats only admissable for corroborating a corroboration warning for testimony of rape victims. Also counsellign privilege and when privelege can be lifted.

    The other ones I did were 2 and 4. 2 was your standard is a confession admissable question, 4 was on when law shifts legal presumption to the accused


  • Options
    #6
    RDMH
    Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭RDMH


    Question 1 had a lot of issues but focused mainly on hearsay, corroboration, bit of compentency (did the accused at that age understand what sexual intercourse was etc) real evidence in the form of the picture, counselling privilege and the consequences of a breach of that privilege to the expert witness (which requires a corroboration warning despite it being discretionary). I think the Inn's may have to look at the effect that this shift in question 1 has on the results. I was in room 1 and there appeared to me to be a collective groan when people realised that it was not following form. I think a few left after the initial hour mark, lot of movement going on behind me at that time.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement