You are on page 1of 14

Semester Exercises from Go...


III. I. For questions 1-20, read the text elo! and thin" of the !ord !hich est fits each ga#. $se onl% one !ord in each ga#. &here is an exam#le at the eginning '0(. Example: (0) grants The Constitution (0) . Congress the power "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, (1) . securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries ..." Copyright coverage (2) the law now includes: architectural design so!tware the graphic arts motion pictures and sound recordings. "t includes articles (#) .writers written and pu$lished (%) .. the internet. &n industry has grown up around internet (') . There are tens o! thousands o! individuals producing material !or internet pu$lication. (() .. law protects these pu$lications. Technology ()) it simple to copy steal and repu$lish these copyrighted wor*s. The repu$lication $y someone other than the owner is a copyright (+) ... There are exceptions !or limited (,) o! copyrighted material. The most claimed $y possi$le in!ringers (-0) .. that o! .!air use/. This is typically using excerpts (--) . reviews and commentary. &c*nowledging that material is (-2) is not a de!ence to in!ringement. .0air use/ is measured $y these !actors: -. The purpose and character o! the use including whether such use is o! commercial nature or is !or nonpro!it educational (-#) ... 2. The nature o! the copyrighted wor*. #. The amount and su$stantiality o! the portion used (-%) ..relation to the copyrighted wor* (-') .a whole. %. The e!!ect o! the use (-() .the potential mar*et !or or value o! the copyrighted wor*. 12 Copyright protection arises automatically when (-)) original wor* o! authorship is !ixed in a tangi$le medium o! expression. 3egistration with the Copyright 4!!ice is optional. "nternational protection is provided (-+) .. several agreements including

the 5erne Convention the 1ni!orm Copyright Convention and the &greement on Trade6 3elated &spects o! "ntellectual 7roperty 3ights. "n the 12 criminal penalties exist (-,) ..copyright in!ringement. 0or a !irst time in!ringer the possi$le penalty is up to a 8'00 000 !ine and9or !ive years in prison. 0or repeat o!!enders the possi$le (20) increases to 8- 000 000 and9or ten years in prison.
)o#%right Infringement of Internet *rticles by avid !. "hesto#as, -2 :uly 200,

I+. ,ead the texts elo! and thin" of a !ord !hich est fits each s#ace. $se onl% one !ord in each s#ace. &here is an exam#le at the eginning '0(. Convention !or the 1ni!ication o! Certain 3ules !or "nternational Carriage (0) by &ir (;<ontreal Convention;) (-) .. opened to signature in <ontreal $y the states participating in the ."nternational Con!erence on &ir =aw/ held (2) .. <ontreal during <ay -0th to 2+th -,,, !or the purpose o! harmoni>ing o! the ?arsaw Convention to today@s conditions. <ontreal Convention to (#) .. Tur*ey is also a signatory state has come (%) .. !orce $y the promulgation o! the .=aw (') .. the &pproval o! Convention !or the 1ni!ication o! Certain 3ules !or "nternational Carriage $y &ir/A num$ered '+(( dated 02.0%.200, and pu$lished in the 4!!icial Ba>ette num$ered 2)200 dated -%.0%.200,. "n accordance (() the last paragraph o! &rticle ,0 o! the Tur*ish Constitution which gives the !orce o! law to the international agreements ()) .. duly come into !orce <ontreal Convention has achieved the similar e!!ect with the =aws o! the Tur*ish 3epu$lic in terms (+) .. its power and $inding e!!ect. <ontreal Convention a!ter !our years o! its $eing open to signature (,) .. <ay -,,,A (-0) .. entered into !orce glo$ally on Covem$er 0% 200# and $ecame $inding (--) .. several states as o! such date. <ontreal Convention $ecame en!orcea$le !or Tur*ey a!ter !ive years !ollowing the Convention@s $ecoming $inding !or the (-2) .. states. <ontreal Convention was executed (-#) .. more than a hundred states including Tur*ey $ut was (-%) .. entered (-') .. !orce $y certain states (,0D o! them are &!rican states) including Tur*ey until &pril 200,.

?arsaw Convention which was replaced $y <ontreal Convention has $een critici>ed !or not protecting the $ene!its (-() .. the passengers (-)) .. its coming into !orce in -,2, even (-+) .. it was generally signed $y most o! the states $ecause o! its provisions relating (-,) .. the payment o! law limits o! indemnities to the victims o! an accident and such provisions $eing more to the !avor o! the airline companies. 2uch criticisms resulted with certain customi>ation activities to (20) .. conducted such as the enactment o! the 7rotocolsA =a Eaye (-,'') <ontreal (-,)-) and Buatemala (-,)').
&he -nl% ,eference for Flight .amages/ )on0ention for the $nification of )ertain ,ules for International )arriage % *ir "erap $uvin and %asan %. &asar, Copyright Clearance -' &ugust 200,

+. ,ead the texts elo! and thin" of a !ord !hich est fits each s#ace. $se onl% one !ord in each s#ace. &here is an exam#le at the eginning '0(. 1-2 .E*&1 3*4ES * .IFFE,E5)E <ost constitutional rights $elong to capital (0) and noncapital de!endants ali*e. The core protections !or criminal cases in the 0ourth 0i!th and 2ixth &mendments !or (-) 6.. apply eFually (2) .. $oth sets o! de!endants. Conversely when the Court reGects arguments !or a proposed right (#) .. similarly treats capital and noncapital cases ali*e. 5ut that is not always the Court@s approach. The Court (%) .. recogni>ed a series o! constitutional (') .. that apply only to capital de!endants. The Court@s cases granting capital de!endants greater procedural and su$stantive protections comprise the .death is di!!erent/ canon. ?hile these cases cover a range o! areas (() .. 7art !ocuses on the Court@s decisions that create a ro$ust role !or Gudges in determining ()) .. a capital sentence is appropriate. The cases discussed (+) .. the su$stantive core o! the Court@s death6is6di!!erent case law and they stand in sharpest contrast with the Court@s noncapital decisions. 7erhaps the most !undamental (,) .. in which the Court treats death di!!erently (-0) .. all other sentences is in its concern !or the exercise o! sentencing discretion. "n death

cases it (--) .. sought to .develop a system o! capital punishment at once consistent and principled $ut (-2) .. humane and sensi$le to the uniFueness o! the individual./ That is the Court has sought (-#) .. to guide discretion and to ensure appropriate individuali>ation. "n nondeath cases the Court has made no e!!ort (-%) .. to control sentencing discretion or to reFuire attention to individual circumstances. HI ?hen the 2upreme Court struc* (-') .. capital punishment as it existed in -,)2 in 'urman v. (eorgia its central concern was avoiding ar$itrary and capricious death sentences. The opinions (-() .. splintered $ut a maGority o! :ustices shared that same $asic sentiment. The Court ended the post6'urman moratorium on the death penalty (-)) .. in those states that had in its view eliminated the danger o! unguided discretion. The Court approved those statutes that were .care!ully dra!ted/ to .ensure that the sentencing authority (-+) .. given adeFuate in!ormation and guidance./ HI The capital punishment statute must (-,) .. $e narrowly tailored so that de!endants convicted (20) .. it deserve its punishment and so that it controls against discriminatory application.
&he )ourt -f Life *nd .eath/ &he &!o &rac"s -f )onstitutional Sentencing La! *nd &he )ase For $niformit% )achel *. +ar#ow, Cew Jor* 1niversity 2chool 4! =aw 7u$lic =awK=egal Theory 3esearch 7aper 2eries 2eptem$er 200+

II. )om#lete the second sentence so that it has a similar meaning to the first sentence. -. :ason@s lawsuit wasn@t as long as 5rian@s. 7rian 6666666666666666666666666666666 . 2. Ee won the trial due to his hard wor*. 7ecause666666666666666666666666666666 . #. They had some pro$lems while de$ating so in the end they did not pass the law. If 666666666666666666666666666666666 . %. &s a conseFuence o! his !ather@s murder he could not go to wor* anymore. Since 6666666666666666666666666666666.. . '. &lthough she was a good lawyer she lost the case.

In s#ite 666666666666666666666666666666.. . (. 2he missed the $uss so she had to ta*e a taxi in order to get to the police. If 66666666666666666666666666666666. . ). " enGoy going to the $each. <y hus$and does not. E0en 666666666666666666666666666666... . +. ?e did not go to prison $ecause they !ound the guilty person. If 66666666666666666666666666666666. . ,. ?hen you read a lot you $ecome more *nowledgea$le. &he 66666666666666666666666666666666. II. For questions 1-8 read the text and decide !hich ans!er '*, 7, ) or .( est fits each ga#. &here is an exam#le at the eginning '0(. Example: (0) history

Cew Eampshire Bov. :ohn =ynch made (0) with the stro*e o! a pen. =ynch signed a $ill that ma*es gay marriage (-) in the state. Concord Cew Eampshire 6 Cew Eampshire $ecame the sixth state to legali>e gay marriage a!ter the 2enate and Eouse passed *ey language on religious (2) and Bov. :ohn =ynch 6 who personally opposes gay marriage 6 signed the legislation ?ednesday a!ternoon. &!ter rallies outside the 2tatehouse $y $oth sides (#) .. the morning the last o! three $ills in the pac*age went to the 2enate which (%) . it -%6-0 ?ednesday a!ternoon. (') .. !rom the gallery greeted the *ey vote in the Eouse which passed it -,+6-)(. 2urrounded $y gay marriage supporters =ynch (() .the $ill a$out an hour later. ;Today we are standing up !or the li$erties o! same6sex couples $y ma*ing clear that they will receive the same ()) .. responsi$ilities L and respect L under Cew Eampshire law ; =ynch said. =ynch a Memocrat had promised a veto i! the law didnNt clearly spell out that churches and religious groups would not $e !orced to (+) .. at gay marriages or provide other services. =egislators made the changes. <assachusetts Connecticut <aine Oermont and "owa already allow gay marriage though opponents hope to overturn <aineNs law with a pu$lic (,).
5e! 1am#shire Legislature *##ro0es Same-Sex 3arriage $y ,orma -ove # :une 200,

0 *. history 1 *. authori>ed 2. *. Gustice 9. *. on :. *. accepted ;. *. Baiety <. *. signed =. *. advantage >. *. chair 8. *. decision

7. legend 7. allowed 7. morality 7. at 7. approved 7. Cheers 7. autographed 7. priority 7. command 7. choice

). antiFuity ). licit ). rights ). through ). appro$ate ). <irth ). endorsed ). !reedom ). o!!iciate 7. su!!rage

.. saga .. legal .. !reedom .. in .. acclaimed .. =iveliness .. registered .. rights .. preside .. vote

I+. ,ead the follo!ing article. For each question choose from the #aragra#hs of the article '*, 7, ) or .(. &here is an exam#le at the eginning '0(.

*. La! should regulate and not strangulate The =aw as an instrument o! social change has its own limitations. :ust as the policeman at the tra!!ic signal merely regulates the natural !low o! tra!!ic instead o! $loc*ing it completely a law i! it is Gust should only regulate the natural impulses o! man such as acFuisitiveness possessiveness rivalry and love o! power. "! laws were made to strangulate such power!ul impulses the individual would !ind moral Gusti!ication to circumvent such laws either $y stealth or through $ri$ery and in extreme cases $y open de!iance. Communism !ailed as it hoped to strangulate and eliminate the !irst two natural impulses o! man namely acFuisitiveness and possessiveness. Cow even communist China is !orced to amend its constitution to recognise the right to property. :ohn <aynard Peynes who was opposed to the method o! ro$$ing 7eter to pay 7aul to $uild an egalitarian society pre!erred the manipulative techniFues such as increasing pu$lic spending i! necessary $y resorting to de!icit !inance (printing money not $ac*ed $y gold reserve) to achieve universal though not eFual prosperity. Eis prescription was to

ma*e use o! the a!oresaid natural impulses o! most men to serve as motive !orce to achieve the desired social o$Gectives instead o! vainly trying to thwart them. 7. 7uilding rules and ?oning regulations HI The municipal laws were changed in &ndhra 7radesh recently. & construction without mere prior approval also attracts imprisonment. 5ureaucratic red tape and corruption are universal in "ndia. 4!ten such provisions o! law are violated on moral Gusti!ications li*e imminent reFuirement o! the $uilding possi$ility o! steep escalation in the cost ma*ing the proGect una!!orda$le due to delay etc. & $uilding should $e demolished only i! it demonstra$ly violates sa!ety reFuirements and not otherwise. The Gudicial pronouncements are on similar lines. 0rom this angle the $uilding rules should $e re!ramed. 2o !ar as the >oning regulations are concerned it is all right to prohi$it industries in residential areas as they there is a possi$ility o! their contri$uting to sound and air pollution. 5ut why shops should not $e permitted in residential areas is not clear. 2hops and o!!ices do not cause any *ind o! pollution. 2uch irrational restrictions lead to inGustice and corruption ridiculing the no$le doctrine o! rule o! law. ). .o!r% @rohi ition la! This pro$lem o! dowry is peculiar to "ndia. "t also depends partly on the population ratio. Earlier there was *anyasul*am which extracted a price !rom the groom to secure a $ride. Cowadays it is the other way round. The anti6dowry legislation ignores the role played $y the giver o! dowry. &!ter all the giver also calculates the $ene!its his daughter would get $y getting married to the most eligi$le $achelor. Co dowry is given $y a rich !ather to a poor and unemployed graduate though he might $e o! good character. Though The Mowry 7rohi$ition &ct !ormerly declares that the giver also should $e punished this has rarely happened as the giver is sympathised with as a victim instead o! a participant in the crime. This law is already $eing misused. & mere allegation o! harassment allegedly !or dowry invites arrests protracted trial and possi$le conviction giving scope !or the police the

prosecutor the Gudge and the de!ence counsel opportunities to ma*e money. The remedy is to recognise that i! dowry is given voluntarily it would not $e an o!!ence though it should $e *ept as a deposit !or the $ene!it o! the $ride unless she voluntarily consents in writing $e!ore the registrar o! documents that it may $e invested in some $usiness venture o! the hus$and. & contract to pay dowry may $e treated as void as $eing opposed to pu$lic policy though not an o!!ence. & mere ver$al demand !or dowry may $e treated as mental cruelty entitling the claim o! maintenance and even divorce. "t is only when physical torture resulting in visi$le inGuries is alleged and proved criminal lia$ility must !ollow. "! such changes are made it $ecomes more di!!icult to ma*e !alse allegations o! dowry harassment with ulterior motives while at the same time the society would en!orce its revulsion to this practice. .. @re0ention of )orru#tion *ct The $ri$e giver should not $e punished as he is a victim and not the aggressor. <oreover detection o! the crime o! corruption $ecomes very di!!icult when the $ri$e giver is also punished. The codi!ied law appears to $e vague a$out the lia$ility o! the $ri$e giver. There were con!licting decisions o! various high Courts pertaining to this aspect 1nder the "ndian 7enal Code. &!ter the special act namely The 7revention o! Corruption &ct replaced the earlier law the $ri$e ta*er and the person who helps in ta*ing the $ri$e namely the middleman come under the purview o! the law. ?hether the $ri$e giver can $e treated as an accomplice is not authoritatively decided. The $ri$e ta*er can compel the giver to o!!er the $ri$e while the $ri$e giver cannot compel the $ri$e ta*er to ta*e against his will. &t the most the $ri$e ta*er might $e tempted $y the repeated o!!ers made $y the giver. Eence a re$utta$le presumption may $e added in the &ct that $ri$e giver was compelled to give the $ri$e $y the ta*er unless the contrary is proved.
&he ,ule of La! and the ,ule of AGoodA La! B.O.ME2&". &dvocate &doni Purnool Mistrict &ndhra 7radesh "ndia Copyright Clearance -% &ugust 200,

2hich #aragra#h mentions/ 0. that law should impose certain limits and regulations and not $loc* human impulsesQ & -. the $ureaucracyQ 2. harassmentQ #. that China has to rcogni>e the right to preopertyQ %. the lia$ility o! the $ri$e giverQ '. opportunities !or the police prosecutor Gudge de!ence counsel to ma*e moneyQ (. violation o! sa!ety reFuirements concerning demolishing actionsQ ). mental cruelty and physical tortureQ +. one manipulative techniFue such as increasing pu$lic spendingQ ,. a purview o! the lawQ -0. that a rich !ather does not give a dowry to a poor graduateQ +. Bou are going to read an article a out a famous actor. 5ine sentences ha0e een remo0ed from the article. )hoose from the sentences *-I the one !hich fits each ga#. &here is one extra sentence !hich %ou do not need to use. <r. 2hepard was stopped !or speeding allegedly travelling %( mph in a #0 mph >one. The stop too* place in Cormal "= the home o! "llinois 2tate 1niversity. <r. 2hepard@s !ame comes !rom $oth acting and writing. (-).. . 2heppard won a 7ulit>er 7ri>e in -,), !or his play .5uried Child/. ?hen ma*ing tra!!ic stops in the early hours o! the morning police are particularly alert !or evidence that the driver may $e impaired $y alcohol. (2) ..&dditional cues can include di!!iculty !or the driver in locating a driver@s license or car insurance or evidence o! impaired driving such as weaving down the road or ignoring tra!!ic control signals. 3eports o! 2hepard@s arrest to date include only the speeding charge. (#) ..&n o!!icer o$serving several o! the a$ove clues may reFuest the driver to ta*e a series o! standardi>ed !ield so$riety tests (202T). (%) .&dditionally the driver may $e reFuested to ta*e a 7orta$le 5reath Test (75T). "n "llinois a driver suspected o! driving under the in!luence has no legal o$ligation to participate in 202T@s or the 75T. (') . The o!!icer may still arrest someone

who has not done the tests $ut there is less evidence o! driving under the in!luence (M1") at a trial when the tests have not $een done. 4nce under arrest the suspect is transported to the police station !or $oo*ing and potentially !urther testing. (().. 7rior to testing "llinois law reFuires the o!!icer to advise the suspect o! the conseFuences o! ta*ing the tests. These conseFuences are related to an individual@s driving privileges. Mriving privileges in "llinois are su$Gect to suspension !or periods ranging !rom ( months to # years !or a person properly arrested !or M1" who either ta*es the chemical test and !ails or re!uses the testing. The legal limit !or driving in "llinois is a 5lood &lcohol Content o! .0+. ()) .<r. 2hepard reportedly too* a $reath test with a result reportedly .-)' more than twice the limit. 0rom that standpoint his driving privileges are li*ely to $e suspended !or six months $eginning 0e$ruary -( 200,. (+) .4n the #-st day o! the suspension a driver may operate a vehicle with a <onitoring Mevice Mriving 7ermit (<MM7) issued $y the "llinois 2ecretary o! 2tate. The <MM7 reFuires the installation o! a 5reath &lcohol "gnition "nterloc* Mevice (5&""M) in any car driven $y the suspended driver. (,) .<r. 2hepard is innocent until proven guilty $ut i! he were to $e !ound guilty or plea guilty he is su$Gect to the penalties o! a Class & <isdemeanour. These penalties range !rom court supervision with alcohol counselling to up to #(% days in Gail and a !ine o! up to 82 '00.
*ctor, @la%!right Sam She#ard *rrested for .$I by avid !. "hesto#as, % :anuary 200,

&. Typically as speeding is common among drivers who are not impaired a speeding charge unless the speed is extreme is not considered evidence o! impairment. 5. This testing can include the chemical testing o! the suspect@s $lood $reath or urine. C. The 5&""M prevents a vehicle !rom starting i! the $reath alcohol o! the driver exceeds .0'. M. The typical 202T@s include: !inger to nose one leg stand and wal* and turn. E. & !irst time o!!ender registering .0+ or greater receives a license suspension o! ( months %( days a!ter the testing and notice o! an impending 2tatutory 2ummary 2uspension. 0. The driver has a right to decline these tests.

B. Ee was nominated !or an 4scar !or portraying test pilot Chuc* Jeager in .The 3ight 2tu!!/ and has appeared in movies such as .The Cote$oo*/ and .5lac*haw* Mown/ E. "n the early morning hours o! :anuary # 200, 2am 2hepard was arrested in Cormal "= and charged with a M1". ". <r. 2hepard is su$Gect to a new "llinois law e!!ective :anuary - 200, relating to relie! !rom a 2tatutory 2ummary 2uspension. :. These initial cues include an odour o! alcohol slurred speech and $loodshot or glassy eyes. +I. Bou are going to read an article a out fraud. 5ine sentences ha0e een remo0ed from the article. )hoose from the sentences *-I the one !hich fits each ga#. &here is one extra sentence !hich %ou do not need to use. ?ashington 6 & !ederal district Gudge ruled <onday that the C"& repeatedly misled him in asserting that state secrets were involved in a -'6year6old lawsuit involving allegedly illegal wiretapping. 1.2. Mistrict :udge 3oyce =am$erth also ordered !ormer C"& director Beorge Tenet and !ive other C"& o!!icials to explain their actions or !ace potential sanctions. (-) ..Ee released hundreds o! previously secret !ilings. ;The court does not give the government a high degree o! de!erence $ecause o! its prior misrepresentations regarding the stated secrets privilege in this case ; =am$erth wrote. ;&lthough this case has $een sealed since its inception to protect sensitive in!ormation it is clear ... that many o! the issues are unclassi!ied.; =am$erthNs ruling comes as some mem$ers o! Congress are Fuestioning the C"&Ns credi$ility in a series o! issues unrelated to the lawsuit including allegations $y Eouse 2pea*er Cancy 7elosi that she was lied to a$out water$oarding and Fuestions o! why Congress wasnNt told !or eight years a$out what reportedly was a plan to assassinate al Raida operatives. =ast month Memocratic mem$ers o! the Eouse "ntelligence Committee as*ed 7anetta to withdraw a statement he made in <ay that it was not C"& policy to mislead Congress. (2) .. The documents released <onday reveal a num$er o! instances where =am$erth said the C"& misrepresented !acts in the case which was !iled in -,,% $y a !ormer Mrug En!orcement &gency o!!icer who said his phone calls had $een illegally intercepted while

he was on duty in 5urma. (#) "t had $een under seal since it was !iled and !ormer presidents 5ill Clinton and Beorge ?. 5ush had sought its dismissal on national security grounds. =am$erth said the agency re!used to ma*e the ;$asic ac*nowledgement; that the spy agency possesses eavesdropping eFuipment even though this is in!ormation Fuic*ly availa$le through a ;pu$lic online encyclopedia.; "n addition he noted that a declaration $y Tenet was never updated a!ter the relevant !acts changed. The issue that angered him most however was the C"&Ns !ailure to reveal that 5rown once undercover had had his cover li!ted in 2002. That !act wasnNt revealed until 200+. =am$erth concluded that the C"&Ns attorneys engaged in a ;!raud on the court; $y not revealing that 5rownNs name no longer needed to $e *ept secret. (%) .&n appeals court overturned that decision. ;The C"& was well6aware that the assertion o! the state secrets privilege as to 5rown was a *ey strategy in getting the case dismissed ; =am$erth stated in a previously sealed 0e$. ( ruling adding that the ;misconduct $y the government ... (raises) very serious implications.; =am$erthNs action <onday came days a!ter a :uly -0 legal !iling $y &ssistant &ttorney Beneral Tony ?est in which he said the C"& ;regrets; not having in!ormed Gudges earlier a$out 5rownNs changed status. &t the same time the :ustice Mepartment attorneys insisted the name o! the C"&Ns !ormer assistant general counsel should remain secret !or !ear that his reputation would otherwise $e harmed. (') Ee also ordered that Tenet 5rown 3adsan and C"& attorneys :e!!rey Jeates :ohn 3i>>o and 3o$ert T. Eatinger explain their actions. & :ustice Mepartment representative declined to comment <onday. & C"& spo*esman told the &ssociated 7ress that the agency ta*es its legal o$ligations seriously. =am$erthNs ruling $rings to the sur!ace a -'6year6old lawsuit that the :ustice Mepartment under three administrations has repeatedly tried to $ury. The case was !iled $y retired Mrug En!orcement &dministration o!!icer 3ichard &. Eorn in &ugust -,,%. Eorn accused Euddle and 5rown o! eavesdropping on his phone conversations while Eorn was the ME&Ns attache in 5urma. (() "t was unclear what 5rownNs position was at the timeA he eventually $ecame the head o! the C"&Ns East &sia division.

Eorn and Euddle had a strained relationship as diplomats and ME& drug6!ighters pursued di!!erent agendas. ()) .. These e!!orts were su$stantial $e told to the 1.2. Congress and the executive $ranchA whereas the (2tate Mepartment) and C"& ... desired to deny 5urma any credit !or its drug en!orcement e!!orts.; Eorn thought that Euddle was trying to !orce him out o! the country. (+) . ;Eorn shows increasing signs o! evident strain ; EuddleNs &ug. -# -,,# ca$le read. ;=ate last night !or example he telephoned his Gunior agent to say that N" am $ringing the whole ME& operation down here. Jou will $e leaving with me.N; Euddle claimed that heNd simply overheard other em$assy o!!icials discuss EornNs telephone conversation. 5rian =eighton EornNs attorney and a !ormer !ederal prosecutor called =am$erthNs decision ;hugely signi!icant.; Ee recalled that pursuing the case has $een a struggle reFuiring him to o$tain a security clearance. ;2ometimes when "Nve !iled a $rie! it will come $ac* with only one word not redacted ; =eighton said. (,) . <onday he said =am$erthNs decision was a victory though the case has yet to $e tried. ;?hy is the government trying to hide (expletive) li*e this !rom usQ; =eighton as*ed. ;?hy in the hell was this case sealed !or so longQ;
Cudge *ccuses )I* -fficials of Fraud, $nseals Secret Files by .ichael oyle 20 :uly 200,

*. The Eouse mem$ers said it was clear !rom 7anettaNs own testimony a$out the unrevealed program that that was not the case. 7. Eorn said he !ound proo! o! the eavesdropping in a ca$le Euddle sent to ?ashington. ). =am$erth however reGected that argument releasing the !iles demanding an explanation !rom Tenet and others and revealing the name o! the !ormer assistant general counsel !or the C"& :ohn 3adsan. .. :a!!e is the son6in6law o! one o! <ado!!Ns longtime customers Carl 2hapiro. E. The suit named a 1.2. diplomat 0ran*lin Euddle :r. and a C"& o!!icer &rthur 5rown as de!endants. F. "n one legal !iling Eorn claimed he wanted ;the truth (concerning) 5urmaNs drug en!orcement e!!orts G. "n !act =am$ert had dismissed the case in 200% citing 5rownNs undercover status.

1. =am$erth also Fuestioned the credi$ility o! current C"& Mirector =eon 7anetta saying that 7anettaNs testimony in the case contained signi!icant discrepancies and reGected an 4$ama administration reFuest that the case continue to $e *ept secret. I. ;4nce that word was Nthe.N; C. Euddle who was then the 1.2. charge dNa!!aires at the 1.2. em$assy in 3angoon 5urma. I+. & local newspaper has recently posted an article on domestic violence solutions and reFuests the readers to provide proposals with new ideas. 2rite a #ro#osal to the ne!s#a#er, gi0ing them %our o#inion on the matter and ma"ing at least t!o suggestions. '200-2;0 !ords( +. The local city council is planning on writing a new guide with the most use!ul in!ormation a$out the legal companies in that part o! the country. They also wish to include some real cases which recommend a company. 2rite %our contri ution to the guide. '2;0-900 !ords( +I. Jour teacher has as*ed you to watch a movie a$out young lawyers. 2he also reFuested that you write a review !or the movie and read it in !ront o! your colleagues. 2rite %our re0ie!, gi0ing %our #ersonal o#inion regarding the mo0ie and the issues it discusses. '200-2;0 !ords(