C. Now listen to the recording. Indicate which of the opinions listed are given by each speaker. In each box, write either: A (Angus) or R (Rick) or B (both Angus and Rick)

Choose the words and expressions from the box to replace the words in italics in the following sentences.

1. She firmly believes that nobody is so bad that he/she cannot be improved.

2. The first suspect’s father paid money to the court so that his son would be released while awaiting trial, but his accomplice had no money and so he was held in prison until the trial was due to take place.

3. Human rights workers in the area report that deliberate murder of whole community has taken place and are demanding that the people responsible for this crime should be put on trial immediately.

4. Members of the United Nations met yesterday to approve and sign a treaty on arms control.

Bail beyond redemption face prosecution genocide on remand perpetrators ratify

B. Do you think that people convicted of such felonies as murder should serve their sentence in full or should they be eligible for amnesty?

C. You will hear a conversation between two friends, Tom and Kate, who are discussing how murderers should be dealt with. For questions 1-8, write YES next to those views which are expressed by either of the speakers, and NO next to those which are not expressed by them.

Note: you are asked to identify opinions expressed by the speakers. Do not confuse these with other people’s opinions which are reported by the speakers.

1. A life sentence should mean that the criminal spends the rest of his/her life in prison. c

2. No criminal is beyond redemption.c

3. Judges should me more open-minded.c

4. Prison sentences fail to rehabilitate criminals.c

5. Serial killers should never be released from prisons.c

6. Murderers are not released if the authorities think they pose a risk to the public.c

7. Protection of the public is more important than individual liberty.c

8. The death penalty should be re-introduced.c

Ex. 36 Render the following text in English:

Как, где и за что казнят

Сегодня смертная казнь юридически отменена во всех странах Европы, кроме разве что России и Турции, где она фактически тоже не применяется. Законодательство Великобритании, Италии, Швейцарии, а также Аргентины, Бразилии, Мексики и некоторых других стран допускает смертную казнь в военное время. Абсолютно исключена смертная казнь в законодательстве Австралии, Австрии, ФРГ, Дании, Норвегии, Швеции и еще в 27 странах.

Смертная казнь применяется в Китае, США, Японии, практически во всех арабских странах и ряде азиатских (Бангладеш, Индия, Индонезия и др.) государств.

Способы казни зависят от ментальности страны. В Китае людей расстреливают, в США – вводят в вену снотворное, затем яд, казнят на электрическом стуле или в газовой камере, вешают. При казни путем введения смертельной инъекции осужденного «обслуживают» 10-12 тюремщиков из числа добровольцев. Каждый имеет свои обязанности: кто-то привязывает ноги, кто-то – руки, кто-то вводит иглу в вену.

В Иране, Пакистане, Бангладеш, Судане и некоторых других исламских странах чаще всего вешают или расстреливают, но за некоторые преступления (супружеская неверность, внебрачные связи) казнят особо – через побивание камнями. При этом существует регламент, определяющий время казни (как правило, утро пятницы), размер камней. Приговоренных женщин перед казнью закапывают по пояс в землю, мужчин связывают по рукам и ногам.

В Афганистане за гомосексуализм замуровывают в стену или ставят приговоренного у стены и обрушивают ее. В Саудовской Аравии гомосексуализм, убийство и изнасилование караются публичной казнью через отсечение головы саблей или мечом.

(«Аргументы и факты в Украине» № 44, 2001 г.)

Ex. 37 A Working in two groups prepare arguments for and against capital punishment. In a general discussion try to prove your point of view to the other group.

B Former New York City Mayor Edward I. Koch gives reasons for supporting capital punishment by examining the arguments “most frequently heard in opposition”. Read the arguments against death penalty and match them with counter arguments provided by Mr. Koch.

Death and Justice

Arguments against capital punishment:

1. The death penalty is “barbaric”.
2. No other major democracy (except the US) uses the death penalty.
3. An innocent person might be executed by mistake.
4. Capital punishment cheapens the value of human life.
5. Thou Shalt Not Kill.
6. The death penalty is state-sanctioned murder.

Edward I. Koch’s counter-arguments:

A On the contrary, it can be easily demonstrated that the death penalty strengthens the value of human life. When we lower the penalty for murder, it signals a lessened regard for the value of the victim’s life. Some critics of capital punishment have suggested that a life sentence is actually a harsher penalty for murder than death. This is sophistic nonsence. A few killers may decide not to appeal a death sentence, but the overwhelming majority make every effort to stay alive. It is by exacting the highest penalty for the taking of human life that we affirm the highest value of human life.

B The Bible is our greatest source of moral inspiration. Opponents of the death penalty frequently cite the sixth of the Ten Commandments in an attempt to prove that capital punishment is divinely proscribed. In the original Hebrew, however, the Sixth Commandment reads “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder”, and the Torah specifies capital punishment for a variety of offences.

C This is the defence with which convicts themselves hope to soften the resolve of those who sentenced them to death. By saying in effect, “you’re no better than I am,” the murderer seeks to bring his accusers down to his own level. It is also a popular argument among opponents of capital punishment, but a transparently false one. Simply put, the state has the rights that the private individual does not. In a democracy, those rights are given to the state by the electorate.

D Sometimes opponents of capital punishment horrify with tales of lingering death on the gallows, or faulty electric chairs, or of agony in the gas chamber. Partly in response to such protests some states switched to execution by lethal injection. The condemned person is put to death painlessly, without ropes, voltage, bullets, or gas. However, it’s not the method that really troubles opponents. It’s the death itself they consider barbaric. Admittedly, capital punishment is not a pleasant topic. We may not like the death penalty, but it must be available to punish crimes of cold-blooded murder, cases in which any other form of punishment would be inadequate and, therefore, unjust.

E According to Mr. Bedeau, one of the opponents of capital punishment, it is “false sentimentality to argue that the death penalty should be abolished because of the abstract possibility that an innocent person might be executed”. He cites a study of 7000 executions in this country from 1893 to 1971, and concludes that the record fails to show that such cases occur. The main point, however, is this. If government functioned only when it the possibility of error didn’t exist, government wouldn’t function at all. Human life deserves special protection, and one of the best ways to guarantee that protection is to assure that convicted murderers do not kill again. Only the death penalty can accomplish this end.

F No other major democracy – in fact, few other countries of any description – are plagued by a murder rate such as that in the United States. Fewer and fewer Americans can remember the days when unlocked doors were the norm and murder was a rare and terrible offence. It is not surprising that the laws of each country differ according to different conditions and traditions. If other countries had our murder problem, the cry for capital punishment would be just as loud as it is here. And I daresay that any other major democracy where 75 percent of the people supported the death penalty would soon enact it into law.

º Ex. 38 A. Now listen to Michael Swarovski, a candidate for the Senate in the State of Texas. In this radio interview he gives his views on the death penalty. Is he for or against it?