请输入或粘贴题目内容
搜题
拍照、语音搜题，请扫码下载APP
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
The judge eventually decided that Mary was guilty and she ____________(被判入狱三年).
答案
更多“The judge eventually decided that Mary was guilty and she ____________（被判入狱三年).”相关的问题
第1题
Fourteen-year-old Kimberly Mays fits neither description, but her recent court victory could eventually help children who do. Kimberly has been the object of an angry custody baffle between the man who raised her and her biological parents, with whom she has never lived. A Florida judge ruled that the teenager can remain with the only father she’s ever known and that her biological parents have “no legal claim” on her.
The ruling, though it may yet be reversed, sets aside the principle that biology is the primary determinant of parentage. That’s an important development, one that’s long overdue.
Shortly after birth in December 1978, Kimberly Mays and another infant were mistakenly switched and sent home with the wrong parents. Kimberly’s biological parents, Ernest and Regina Twigg, received a child who died of a heart disease in 1988. Medical tests showed that the child wasn’t the Twiggs’ own daughter, but Kimt only was, thus sparking a custody battle with Robert Mays. In 1989, the two families agreed that Mr. Mays would maintain custody with the Twiggs getting visiting fights. Those rights were ended when Mr. Mays decided that Kimberly was being harmed.
The decision to leave Kimberly with Mr. Mays rendered her suit debated. But the judge made clear that Kimberly did have standing to sue （起诉） on her own behalf. Thus he made clear that she was more than just property to be handled as adults saw fit.
Certainly, the biological link between parent and child is fundamental. But biological parents aren’t always preferable to adoptive ones, and biological parentage does not convey an absolute ownership that cancels all the rights of children.
第36题：What was the primary consideration in the Florida judge’s ruling？
A．The biological link.
B．The child’s benefits.
C．The traditional practice.
D．The parents’ feelings.
第2题
Fourteen-year-old Kimberly Mays fits neither description, but her recent court victory could eventually help children who do. Kimberly has been the object of an angry custody battle between the man who raised her and her biological parents, with whom she has never lived. A Florida judge ruled that the teenager can remain with the only father she's ever known and that her biological parents have "no legal claim" on her.
The ruling, though it may yet be reversed, sets aside the principle that biology is the primary determinant of parentage. That's an important development, one that's long overdue.
Shortly after birth in December 1978, Kimberly Mays and another infant were mistakenly switched and sent home with the wrong parents. Kimberly's biological parents, Ernest and Regina Twigg, received a child who died of a heart disease in 1988, Medical tests showed that the child wasn't the Twiggs' own daughter, but Kimberly was, thus sparking a custody battle with Robert Mays. In 1989, the two families agreed that Mr. Mays would maintain custody with the Twiggs getting visiting rights. Those rights were ended when Mr. Mays decided that Kimberly was being harmed.
The decision to leave Kimberly with Mr. Mays rendered her suit debated. But the judge made clear that Kimberly did have standing to sue(起诉) on her own behalf. Thus he made clear that she was more than just property to be handled as adults saw fit.
Certainly, the biological link between parent and child is fundamental. But biological parents aren't always preferable to adoptive ones, and biological parentage does not convey an absolute ownership that cancels all the rights of children.
What was the primary consideration in the Florida judge's ruling？
A．The biological link.
B．The traditional practice.
C．The child's benefits.
D．The parents' feelings.
第3题
&8226;Read the article below about Microsoft anti-trust suit.
&8226;Choose the best sentence from the opposite page to fill each of the gaps.
&8226;For each gap 8--12, mark one letter (A--G) on your Answer Sheet.
&8226;Do not use any letter more than once.
WHAT NEXT IN THE MICROSOFT SUIT
The Justice Department's top anti-trust prosecutor says this week that the government is looking at a full range of remedies. It wants to find the appropriate punishment following a judge's ruling that Microsoft is a monopoly, including the possible breakup of the software company. "We are looking at the range of sanctions; we're talking to people in the industry, people who work with Microsoft, people who manufacture computers and we're doing an analysis to make sure that we have a remedy that will promote competition, assure innovation and promote consumer choice, " he said. He thought the judge was quite clear that innovation has been impaired and he had heard all the evidence.
Meanwhile, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates said in a letter published today that the software maker is committed to "a fair and responsible" resolution of the anti-trust trial.
(8) "We've been here before in a first lawsuit, " he said. "And eventually the courts came out on the side of the consumer, saying that all companies should have the ability to innovate their products and take their chances in the marketplace."
(9) "As this case moves toward resolution, Microsoft's 30, 000 employees are focused on creating the next generation of products that will deliver the benefits of the Information Age, anytime, anywhere and on any device, " Gates wrote. (10) .
On Friday, Jackson took Microsoft to task for numerous instances of anti-competitive behavior, including its dealings with America Online over the latter's browser choices, its contracts with PC makers, which forced them to feature prominently the Internet Explorer Web browser instead of Netscape's competing product. (11) .
The judge noted that Microsoft's own studies confirmed that Microsoft could have charged only $ 49 per Windows upgrade and still remained profitable, and that it had enough power within the market to charge $ 89. (12) It is through high "barriers to entry", in other words, by making it more costly to create competing software.
A Bob Herbold, the executive vice president and chief operating officer for Microsoft, said that the judge's ruling this week is just a first step in the process that is just getting under way.
B Microsoft's competitors know that the company in fact has a referee starting directly over the shoulder every time it moves on a playing field.
C What's more, Microsoft erected the barriers to keep others out of the marketplace.
D The Justice Department's top anti-trust prosecutor says this week that the government is looking at a full range of remedies.
E Jackson said that the company took that additional profit and invested it not in its own products but in efforts to keep other companies out of various software markets. Meanwhile Bill Gates, in a full-page advertisement published in the Washington Post and addressed to the company's customers, partners and shareholders, commented on Friday's ruling.
G He claimed that Microsoft is committed to resolving this matter in a fair and responsible manner, while ensuring that the fundamental principles of consumer benefit and innovation are protected.
(8)
第4题
System of Criminal Trial
How efficient is our system of criminal trial？ Does it really do the basic job we ask of it— convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent？ It is often said that the British trail system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. The lawyers on each side are so en- grossed in playing hard to win, challenging each other and the judge on technical points, that the object of finding out the truth is almost forgotten. All the effort is concentrated on the big day, on the dramatic cross examination of the key witnesses in front of the jury. Critics like to compare our "adversarial" system (resembling two adversaries engaged in a contest) with the continental "inquisitorial" system, under which the judge plays a more important inquiring role.
In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were similar. At that time trial by "ordeal"—especially a religious event—was the main way of testing guilt or innocence. When this way eventually abandoned the two systems parted company. On the continent church-trained legal officials took over the function of both prosecuting and judging, while in England these were largely left to lay people, the Justice of the Peace and this meant that all the evidence had to be put to them orally, this historical accident dominates procedure even today, with all evidence being given in open court by word of mouth on the crucial day.
On the other hand, in France for instance, all the evidence is written before the trial under supervision by an investigating judge. This exhaustive pretrial looks very undramatic; much of it is just a public checking of the written records already gathered.
The Americans adopted the British system lock, stock and barrel and enshrined it in their constitution. But, while the basic features of our systems are common, there are now significant differences in the way serious cases are handled. First, because the U. S.A. has virtually no contempt of court laws to prevent pretrial publicity in the newspaper and on television, Americans lawyers are allowed to question jurors about knowledge and beliefs.
In Britain this is virtually never allowed, and a random selection of jurors who are presumed not to be prejudiced are empanelled. Secondly, there is no separate profession of barrister in the United States, and both prosecution and defense lawyers who are to present cases in court prepare them themselves. They go out and visit the scene, track down and interview witnesses, and familiarize themselves personally with the background. In Britain it is the solicitor who prepares the case, and the barrister who appears in court is not even slowed to meet witness beforehand. British barristers also alternate doing both prosecution and defense work. Being kept distant from the preparation and regularly appearing for both sides, barristers are said to avoid becoming too personally involved, and can approach cases more dispassionately. American lawyers, however, often know their cases better.
Reformers rightly want to learn from other countries' mistakes and successes. But what is clear is that justice systems, largely because they are the result of long historical growth, are peculiarly difficult to adapt piecemeal.
"British trial system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. " It implies that______.
A．the British legal system can do the basic job well—convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent
B．the British legal system is worse than the continental legal system
C．the British legal system is often considered to be not very fair
D．the British legal system is very efficient
第5题
In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were similar. At that time trial by "ordeal" — especially a religious event — was the main way of testing guilt or innocence. When this way eventually abandoned the two systems parted company. On the continent church-trained legal officials took over the function of both prosecuting and judging, while in England these were largely left to lay people, the Justice of the Peace and the jurymen who were illiterate and this meant that all the evidence had to be put to them orally. This historical accident dominates procedure even today, with all evidence being given in open court by word of mouth on the crucial day.
On the other hand, in France for instance, all the evidence is written before the trial under supervision by an investigating judge. This exhaustive pretrial looks very undramatic; much of its is just a public checking of the written records already gathered.
The Americans adopted the British system lock, stock and barrel and enshrined it in their constitution. But, while the basic features of our systems are common, there are now significant differences in the way serious cases are handled. First, because the USA has virtually no contempt of court laws to prevent pretrial publicity in the newspaper and on television, Americans lawyers are allowed to question jurors about knowledge and beliefs.
In Britain this is virtually never allowed, and a random selection of jurors who are presumed not to be prejudiced are empanelled. Secondly, there is no separate profession of barrister in the United States, and both prosecution and defense lawyers who are to present cases in court prepare themselves. They go out and visit the scene, track down and interview witnesses, and familiarize themselves personally with the background. In Britain it is the solicitor who prepares the case, and the barrister who appears in court is not even allowed to meet witnesses beforehand. British barristers also alternate doing both prosecution and defense work. Being kept distant from the preparation and regularly appearing for both sides, barristers are said to avoid becoming too personally involved, and can approach cases more dispassionately. American lawyers, however, often know their cases better.
Reformers rightly want to learn from other countries' mistakes and successes. But what is clear is that justice systems, largely because they are the result of long historical growth, are peculiarly difficult to adapt piecemeal.
"The British trial system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice" (Lines 2～3, Para- graph 1) implies that ______.
A．the British legal system can do the basic job well — convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent
B．the British legal system is worse than the continental legal system
C．the British legal system is often considered to be not very fair
D．tbe British legal system is very efficient
第6题
Text 3
Bernard Jackson is a free man today, but he has many bitter memories. Jackson spent five years in prison after a jury wrongly convicted him of raping two women. At Jackson' s trial, although two witnesses testified that Jackson was with them in another location at the times of thcrimes, he was convicted anyway. Why？ The jury believed the testimony of the two victims, who positively identified Jackson as the man who had attacked them. The court eventually freed Jackson after the police found the man who had really committed the crimes.
Many factors influence the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. For instance, witnesses some-times see photographs of several suspects before they try to identify the person they saw in a lineup of people. They can become confused by seeing many photographs of similar faces. The number of people in the lineup, and whether it is a live lineup or a photograph, may also affect a witness' s decision. People sometimes have difficulty identifying people of other races. The questions the po-lice ask witnesses also have an effect on them.
Many people believe that police officers are more reliable than ordinary people. Psychologists decided to test this idea, and they discovered that it is not true. Two psychologists showed a film of crimes to both police officers and civilians. The psychologists found no difference between the police and the civilians in correctly remembering the details of the crimes. .
Despite all the possibilities for inaccuracy, courts cannot exclude eyewitness testimony from a trial. American courts depend almost completely on eyewitness testimony to resolve court cases. Sometimes it is the only evidence to a crime, such as rape. Furthermore, eyewitness testimony is often correct. Although people do sometimes make mistakes, many times they really do identify in dividuals correctly.
American courts depend on the ability of the twelve jurors, and not the judges, to determine the accuracy of the witness' s testimony. It is their responsibility to decide if a certain witness could actually see, hear, and remember what occurred.
In a few cases the testimony of eyewitnesses has convicted innocent people. More important ly,it has rightly convicted a larger number of guilty people; consequently, it continues to be of great value in the American judicial system.
56. Benard Jackson was found guilty by the jury because_________ .
[A] the victims insisted that he was the attacker
[ B] the judge believed in the victims' identification
[ C] the police discovered evidence leading to his guilt
[D] the eyewinesses confirmed the victims' testimony
第7题
The Body Thieves
In the early nineteenth century in Britain, many improvements were being made in the world of medicine. Doctors and surgeons were becoming more knowledgeable about the human body. Illnesses that had been fatal a few years before were now curable. However, surgeons had one problem. They needed dead bodies to cut up, or dissect (解剖). This was the only way that they could learn about the flesh and bones inside the body, and the only way to teach new surgeons to carry out operations.
The job of finding these dead bodies was carried out by an unpleasant group of people called "body snatchers". They went into graveyards (墓地) at night and, using wooden shovels to make less noise, dug up any recently buried bodies. Then they took the bodies to the medical schools and sold them. A body could be sold for between ￡5 and ￡10, which was a lot of money at that time. The doctors who paid the body snatchers had an agreement with them—they never asked any questions. They did not desire to know where the bodies came from, as long as they kept arriving.
The most famous of these body snatchers were two men from Edinburgh called William Burke and William Hare. Burke and Hare were different because they did not just dig up bodies from graveyards. They got greedy and thought of an easier way to find bodies. Instead of digging them up, they killed the poorer guests in Hare's small hotel. Dr Knox, the respected surgeon they worked for, never asked why all the bodies they brought him had been strangled (勒死).
For many years Burke and Hare were not caught because, unsurprisingly, the bodies of their victims were never found by the police. They were eventually arrested and put on trial in 1829. The judge showed mercy to Hare and he was released but Burke was found guilty and his punishment was to be hanged. Appropriately, his body was given to the medical school and he ended up on the dissecting table, just like his victims. In one small way, justice was done.
Now, over 150 years later, surgeons do not need the help of criminals to learn their skills. However, the science of surgery could not have developed without their rather gruesome (令人毛骨悚然的) help.
The problem facing British surgeons in the early 19th century was that
A．some illnesses remained incurable.
B．few people were willing to work as surgeons.
C．medical expenses were too high.
D．dead bodies were not easily available.
第8题
Many factors influence the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. For instance, witnesses some times see photographs of several suspects before they try to identify the person they saw in a lineup of people. They can become confused by seeing many photographs of similar faces. The number of people in the lineup, and whether it is a live lineup or a photograph, may also affect a witness's decision. People sometimes have difficulty identifying people of other races. The questions the police ask witnesses also have an effect on them.
Many people believe that police officers are more reliable than ordinary people. Psychologists decided to test this idea, and they discovered that it is not true. Two psychologists showed a film of crimes to both police officers and civilians. The psychologists found no difference between the police and the civilians in correctly remembering the details of the crimes.
Despite all the possibilities for inaccuracy, courts cannot exclude eyewitness testimony from a trial. American courts depend almost completely on eyewitness testimony to resolve court cases. Sometimes it is the only evidence to a crime, such as rape. Furthermore, eyewitness testimony is often correct. Although people do sometimes make mistakes, many times they really do identify in dividuals correctly.
American courts depend on the ability of the twelve jurors, and not the judges, to determine the accuracy of the witness' s testimony. It is their responsibility to decide if a certain witness could actually see, hear, and remember what occurred.
In a few cases the testimony of eyewitnesses has convicted innocent people. More importantly, it has rightly convicted a larger number of guilty people; consequently, it continues to be of great value in the American judicial system.
Benard Jackson was found guilty by the jury because______.
A．the victims insisted that he was the attacker
B．the judge believed in the victims' identification
C．the police discovered evidence leading to his guilt
D．the eyewitnesses confirmed the victims' testimony
第9题
The main idea of the quoted blog is that______.
A．some people undergo facial surgery for wrong reasons
B．the patients will eventually find facial surgeries unsatisfying
C．plastic surgery can cause a loss of self identity
D．people"s facial features are important for their self identity
