Secondary Catalogue

The 2011 Workplace Health and Safety Act introduced several new terms to reflect the changing nature of workplace relationships in the 21st century. PCBU was one such term that has subsequently been further expanded upon in the 2018 review, indicative of how fast change is occurring. Defining key terms surrounding WHS duties in a clear and concise manner, this is important viewing for senior secondary and TAFE students. Show Less

From their initial 19th century iteration, which focused heavily on the factory-based work of the day, workplace health and safety laws have come a long way. This video examines a timeline of WHS legislation in Australia, from the push towards national uniformity of standards and regulations, to the implementation of the 2011 Workplace Health and Safety Act and subsequent 2018 review, this is important viewing for senior secondary and TAFE students. Show Less

While WHS legislation provides measures that seek to prevent workplace accidents, it also stipulates the processes and penalties that are applicable should one occur. Accidents resulting in death, serious injury or near misses are assessed on risk and culpability, and PCBUs, officers and workers can face hefty fines and jailtime. Setting out key information in a clear and concise manner, this is important viewing for senior secondary and TAFE students. Show Less

This case study likewise involves the contrast between well-presented and poorly presented evidence. In this scenario, the expert is being asked to explain the likelihood of DNA being accidentally transferred onto a train platform. The expert has previously given evidence about the way in which DNA can be transferred (through bodily fluids or tissues). Show Less

In the first example, the expert, Joe Bednall, appears to be mostly reading his evidence and doesn’t give the impression he’s across his material. The second example, the expert reads his statement, but punctuates the testimony with frequent glances toward counsel and the judge/jury. Note the firmer intonation in his voice. Show Less

In the first example, the expert, Dr Jodie Witkowski, makes the statement that suggests uncertainty about her material. No eye contact to the judge. The second example, the expert clearly and carefully articulates her information in an assertive way, looking at both the barrister and the judge. Show Less

In the first example, the expert, forensic scientist Dr Fred Anderson, makes the statement, with a questioning intonation in his voice. The second example, the same words, but delivered with aplomb. This time the expert looks towards the judge / jury. Show Less

A comparison between a question asked in an unclear manner by the lawyer, and a clearly asked question. In this scenario, the lawyer is attempting to undermine the expert witness’s credibility. The expert is being asked how frequently he has examined the transfer of DNA. Show Less

A comparison between a question asked in an unclear manner by the lawyer, and a clearly asked question. In this scenario, the lawyer is attempting to undermine the expert witness’s credibility. The expert is being asked how frequently he has examined the transfer of DNA. Show Less

This case study is a comparison between well-presented and poorly presented evidence. In this scenario, the expert is being asked about his investigation of a boat’s sinking rate. As part of the examination in chief, the expert is asked to explain how the “floodable volume” of the boat was determined. The expert is Mr Joe Bendall, who has a degree in architecture and boat design. Show Less

This case study demonstrates the importance of preparation for presentation in court. The scenario demonstrates where an expert witness, Dr Jodie Witkowski, has failed to organise her notes. Her lack of preparation is revealed when the barrister cross-examines her. Show Less

This case study examines the error of acting outside one’s area of expertise. The expert is being asked to explain the process of ouchterlony, an immunological technique used to detect the presence of human haemoglobin. The expert is Fred Anderson, who has a science degree with a major in genetics. He works as a forensic scientist specialising in population genetics, and a large amount of his work is in the area of DNA profiling. Show Less