[CCCure CISSP] Qs4 Law: cccure QuizEngn doubts

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[CCCure CISSP] Qs4 Law: cccure QuizEngn doubts

Amlan Deb
Hello everyone,
 
I have some doubts regarding some cccure Quiz questions and concepts mentioned below. Would really appreciate it if you could take out some time and help me with them. Request you to please provide a quick reply as I need to appear for the exam in the month of July.
 
Thanks,
Amlan
 

Doubt#4
========

56. 

1.     Question: 1359 | Difficulty: 3/5 | Relevancy: 3/3

Which of the following would best describe secondary evidence?

o      Oral testimony by a non-expert witness

o      Oral testimony by an expert witness

o     A copy of a piece of evidence

o      Evidence that proves a specific act

You did not provide any answer to this question. Please review details below.

Secondary evidence is defined as a copy of evidence or oral description of its contents. It is considered not as reliable as best evidence. Evidence that proves or disproves a specific act through oral testimony based on information gathered through he witness's five senses is considered direct evidence. The fact that testimony is given by an expert only affects the witness's ability to offer an opinion instead of only testifying of the facts.
Source: KRUTZ, Ronald L. & VINES, Russel D.,
The CISSP Prep Guide: Mastering the Ten Domains of Computer Security, John Wiley & Sons, 2001, Chapter 9: Law, Investigation, and Ethics (page 310).

Last modified 07/02/2007, Ron Hehemann

Contributor: Christian Vezina

Covered topic: <A title="Evidence types and admissibility - Computer crime evidence can be of many types (best, secondary, direct, conclusive, circumstantial, hearsay or opinions). To be admissible in a court of law, it must meet certain stringent requirements." href="javascript:void(0)">Evidence types and admissibility

 

My doubt:  Why can’t option ‘A’ be the correct answer?

As per Shon Harris AIO 6th Edition, Pg 1055: 

“Oral evidence, such as a witness’s testimony is considered Secondary Evidence.

One example of direct evidence is the testimony of a witness who saw a crime take place. Although this oral evidence would be secondary in nature.”

I also notice that the definition of Secondary Evidence as per the explanation in the answer doesn’t even touch upon witness testimony. It only includes Witness testimony under Direct evidence.

Which definition should we consider correct ?

_______________________________________________
You can find the list archive at:
http://cissp-study.3965.n7.nabble.com/

CISSPstudy mailing list
[hidden email]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, SUBSCRIBE, or MANAGE your accout visit the link below:
http://cccure.org/mailman/listinfo/cisspstudy_cccure.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CCCure CISSP] Qs4 Law: cccure QuizEngn doubts

Stephens
STOP DUDE!!!



On Jun 3, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Amlan Deb <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello everyone,
 
I have some doubts regarding some cccure Quiz questions and concepts mentioned below. Would really appreciate it if you could take out some time and help me with them. Request you to please provide a quick reply as I need to appear for the exam in the month of July.
 
Thanks,
Amlan
 

Doubt#4
========

56. 

1.     Question: 1359 | Difficulty: 3/5 | Relevancy: 3/3

Which of the following would best describe secondary evidence?

o      Oral testimony by a non-expert witness

o      Oral testimony by an expert witness

o     A copy of a piece of evidence

o      Evidence that proves a specific act

You did not provide any answer to this question. Please review details below.

Secondary evidence is defined as a copy of evidence or oral description of its contents. It is considered not as reliable as best evidence. Evidence that proves or disproves a specific act through oral testimony based on information gathered through he witness's five senses is considered direct evidence. The fact that testimony is given by an expert only affects the witness's ability to offer an opinion instead of only testifying of the facts.
Source: KRUTZ, Ronald L. & VINES, Russel D.,
The CISSP Prep Guide: Mastering the Ten Domains of Computer Security, John Wiley & Sons, 2001, Chapter 9: Law, Investigation, and Ethics (page 310).

Last modified 07/02/2007, Ron Hehemann

Contributor: Christian Vezina

Covered topic: <a title="Evidence types and admissibility - Computer crime evidence can be of many types (best, secondary, direct, conclusive, circumstantial, hearsay or opinions). To be admissible in a court of law, it must meet certain stringent requirements." href="javascript:void(0)">Evidence types and admissibility

 

My doubt:  Why can’t option ‘A’ be the correct answer?

As per Shon Harris AIO 6th Edition, Pg 1055: 

“Oral evidence, such as a witness’s testimony is considered Secondary Evidence.

One example of direct evidence is the testimony of a witness who saw a crime take place. Although this oral evidence would be secondary in nature.”

I also notice that the definition of Secondary Evidence as per the explanation in the answer doesn’t even touch upon witness testimony. It only includes Witness testimony under Direct evidence.

Which definition should we consider correct ?
_______________________________________________
You can find the list archive at:
http://cissp-study.3965.n7.nabble.com/

CISSPstudy mailing list
[hidden email]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, SUBSCRIBE, or MANAGE your accout visit the link below:
http://cccure.org/mailman/listinfo/cisspstudy_cccure.org

_______________________________________________
You can find the list archive at:
http://cissp-study.3965.n7.nabble.com/

CISSPstudy mailing list
[hidden email]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, SUBSCRIBE, or MANAGE your accout visit the link below:
http://cccure.org/mailman/listinfo/cisspstudy_cccure.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CCCure CISSP] Qs4 Law: cccure QuizEngn doubts

cybbercops
LMAO...I was wondering when someone was going to go there...


From: "Stephens" <[hidden email]>
To: "The CISSP Study Mailing list" <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 1:23:08 PM
Subject: Re: [CCCure CISSP] Qs4 Law: cccure QuizEngn doubts

STOP DUDE!!!



On Jun 3, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Amlan Deb <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello everyone,
 
I have some doubts regarding some cccure Quiz questions and concepts mentioned below. Would really appreciate it if you could take out some time and help me with them. Request you to please provide a quick reply as I need to appear for the exam in the month of July.
 
Thanks,
Amlan
 

Doubt#4
========

56. 

1.     Question: 1359 | Difficulty: 3/5 | Relevancy: 3/3

Which of the following would best describe secondary evidence?

o      Oral testimony by a non-expert witness

o      Oral testimony by an expert witness

o     A copy of a piece of evidence

o      Evidence that proves a specific act

You did not provide any answer to this question. Please review details below.

Secondary evidence is defined as a copy of evidence or oral description of its contents. It is considered not as reliable as best evidence. Evidence that proves or disproves a specific act through oral testimony based on information gathered through he witness's five senses is considered direct evidence. The fact that testimony is given by an expert only affects the witness's ability to offer an opinion instead of only testifying of the facts.
Source: KRUTZ, Ronald L. & VINES, Russel D.,
The CISSP Prep Guide: Mastering the Ten Domains of Computer Security, John Wiley & Sons, 2001, Chapter 9: Law, Investigation, and Ethics (page 310).

Last modified 07/02/2007, Ron Hehemann

Contributor: Christian Vezina

Covered topic: <A title="Evidence types and admissibility - Computer crime evidence can be of many types (best, secondary, direct, conclusive, circumstantial, hearsay or opinions). To be admissible in a court of law, it must meet certain stringent requirements." href="about:blank" target=_blank>Evidence types and admissibility

 

My doubt:  Why can’t option ‘A’ be the correct answer?

As per Shon Harris AIO 6th Edition, Pg 1055: 

“Oral evidence, such as a witness’s testimony is considered Secondary Evidence.

One example of direct evidence is the testimony of a witness who saw a crime take place. Although this oral evidence would be secondary in nature.”

I also notice that the definition of Secondary Evidence as per the explanation in the answer doesn’t even touch upon witness testimony. It only includes Witness testimony under Direct evidence.

Which definition should we consider correct ?
_______________________________________________
You can find the list archive at:
http://cissp-study.3965.n7.nabble.com/

CISSPstudy mailing list
[hidden email]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, SUBSCRIBE, or MANAGE your accout visit the link below:
http://cccure.org/mailman/listinfo/cisspstudy_cccure.org

_______________________________________________
You can find the list archive at:
http://cissp-study.3965.n7.nabble.com/

CISSPstudy mailing list
[hidden email]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, SUBSCRIBE, or MANAGE your accout visit the link below:
http://cccure.org/mailman/listinfo/cisspstudy_cccure.org

_______________________________________________
You can find the list archive at:
http://cissp-study.3965.n7.nabble.com/

CISSPstudy mailing list
[hidden email]

To UNSUBSCRIBE, SUBSCRIBE, or MANAGE your accout visit the link below:
http://cccure.org/mailman/listinfo/cisspstudy_cccure.org