Chapter 3:  Quiz ANSWERS

 

 

Section 1:  True/False

Please indicate which answers below are true and which are false.

 

1.     A lawyer can offer an opinion to the jury about the facts in a case.

ANS: False

2.     When witnesses are on the stand, they should tell the jury about their personal opinion about the facts of the case.

ANS: False

3.     Testimony is not evidence; it is opinion.

ANS: False

4.     A lawyer can vouch for a witness’s credibility.

ANS: False

 

5.     Identical twins have the same fingerprints.

ANS: False

 

6.     Identical twins have the same DNA

ANS: True

 

7.     In some situations, DNA can be recovered from tissue and other objects years after it was left behind.

ANS: True

 

8.     When DNA evidence is corrupted, it can give a false indication that someone else committed the crime.

ANS: False

 

9.     Blood tests are just as informative as DNA tests.

ANS: False

 

10.            Eyewitness testimony has been shown to be chronically unreliable.

ANS: True

Section 2:  Multiple Choice

Please indicate the correct answer for the following questions:

1.     What is the primary difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?
a. direct evidence is admissible, circumstantial is not
b. a case can be based entirely on direct evidence, but not entirely on circumstantial evidence
c. direct evidence is a fact, circumstantial evidence suggests a fact
d. there is no difference between direct and circumstantial evidence

ANS: C

2.     What are the sanctions for an improper lineup?
a. the officer can be fined
b. the judge can order a reduced sentence
c. the prosecutor could be fined
d. the evidence will not be admitted

ANS: D

3.     What is ‘chain of custody?’
a. the link between the defendant and his term of incarceration
b. the link between the evidence and who possessed it
c. the connecting chain of events leading to the defendant’s arrest
d. the proof necessary to convict the defendant

ANS: B

 

4.     What are ‘foundation questions?’
a. questions of the witness to show his knowledge of the subject matter
b. questions of the defendant to show his degree of guilt
c. questions of a witness to show the relevancy of evidence
d. questions of the jury to determine guilt or innocence of the accused

ANS: C

 

 

5.     During Carl’s interrogation, he takes a polygraph test. The results of the test indicate deception. Will the jury be permitted to view these results?
a. Yes, because they occurred during a legal interrogation
b. Yes, because Carl was under arrest at the time of the test
c. No, because Carl was not aware of the legal ramifications of the test
d. No, because polygraph results are not admissible

ANS: D

 

 

6.     A suspect’s skin and blood are discovered at the scene of the crime. The DNA is run through the FBI’s DNA database and a positive match results, showing that the tissue belongs to Carl Doe. Will this evidence be admissible at trial?
a. No, because it is circumstantial evidence
b. No, because Carl did not consent to having this sample run through the database
c. Yes, because
DNA evidence cannot be challenged
d. Yes, because it shows that Carl was present at the scene

ANS: D

 

7.     After Carl’s arrest, his appointed counsel informs him that the police want to stage a live, physical line-up. Carl is brought to a room where there is a one-way mirror and several other people who look more or less like Carl. However, just before the line-up, Carl’s attorney is prevented from attending. The victim positively identifies Carl as the attacker. Will this identification be admitted at trial?
a. Yes, because the line-up was constitutionally valid
b. Yes, because Carl’s attorney had no right to be present
c. No, because Carl did not consent to the line-up
d. No, because Carl’s attorney had the right to be present

ANS: D

 

 

8.     Carl is stopped on the street, handcuffed and then taken back to a waiting patrol car. The officer shoves Carl’s face against the glass window and asks the person in the back seat, “Is this the man who attacked you?” The witness says yes and Carl is arrested. Is this identification admissible at trial?
a. Yes, because Carl was validly arrested
b. Yes, because the witness identified Carl
c. No, because Carl was not read his Miranda rights
d. No, because it was an impermissible ‘show-up’

ANS: D

 

 

9.     Who has the final say on the weight to be given any particular piece of evidence?
a. the jury
b. the judge
c. the prosecutor
d. the defense attorney

ANS: A

 

 

10.            A judge rules that certain evidence is ‘admissible.’ What does this mean?
a. that the evidence establishes the defendant’s guilt
b. that the jury will be allowed to hear/see the evidence
c. that the prosecution’s evidence is better than that of the defense
d. that the jury will not be allowed to hear/see the evidence

ANS: B