0
John Rochester Posted 10 years ago
Essay & Composition Writing
Please help to check my IELTS task 2 essay? I need band 7 or above :(
Questions: Whether or not the jury should be allowed access to the defendant’s past criminal records.
It has been the norm that the juries in British and Australian courts are prohibited by law from reviewing the defendant’s criminal history. However, some argue that the practice should be changed to allow the juries to have full access to the past criminal records of the defendants, so that justice can be better exercised. This essay will discuss on whether or not the past criminal records should be admitted in the judicial proceedings.
The advocates of the current law state that revealing the defendant’s past criminal records- which are totally unrelated to the current case- risks the miscarriage of justice. It is the human nature to prejudice. Although the juries take an oath not to be influenced by the personal judgement in making the verdict, it is likely that they- in their conscious or subconscious minds- may have the tendency to judge the defendant based on their characters or past criminal acts, hence, leading to a potentially wrong assumption that the defendant is guilty. The effect is scientifically proven as the “halo” or “horn” effect which explains the human tendency to judge a person as all good or all bad based on a certain characteristic or act. Therefore, by allowing the juries the access to the defendant’s past criminal records, there are the risk of the defendant being wrongly prosecuted without the proper evidence, as well as the risk of the real culprit being let loose to commit another crime.
On the other hand, some argue that the law denying the juries the access to the criminal records protects the assailant, not the victim. On 6th June 1993, Shiree Turner was brutally murdered, but the suspect charged with the murder was acquitted on the ground of insufficient evidence. It was only after the acquittal that the jury and the public learned that suspect had been charged with crimes of the same nature in the past. Much to the public devastation, the suspect-uncharged and unprosecuted- assaulted another victim. Thus, if the past criminal history of the suspect was admitted to the court as an evidence of the suspect’s repeated pattern of crimes, not only it would have brought justice to the Shiree Turner’s family but also it would have prevented further crimes by the suspect.
In conclusion, the jury should be allowed access to the defendant’s past criminal records, only if the records can be used as supportive evidences related to the current case. There have been a number of incidents where the court accepts the submission of the past criminal records as similar fact evidence or propensity evidence for child molestation and theft cases. Hence, it will be beneficial if the law permits the jury the access to the past criminal history with exception that it enables the jury to make a verdict in the favour of justice.
It has been the norm that the juries in British and Australian courts are prohibited by law from reviewing the defendant’s criminal history. However, some argue that the practice should be changed to allow the juries to have full access to the past criminal records of the defendants, so that justice can be better exercised. This essay will discuss on whether or not the past criminal records should be admitted in the judicial proceedings.
The advocates of the current law state that revealing the defendant’s past criminal records- which are totally unrelated to the current case- risks the miscarriage of justice. It is the human nature to prejudice. Although the juries take an oath not to be influenced by the personal judgement in making the verdict, it is likely that they- in their conscious or subconscious minds- may have the tendency to judge the defendant based on their characters or past criminal acts, hence, leading to a potentially wrong assumption that the defendant is guilty. The effect is scientifically proven as the “halo” or “horn” effect which explains the human tendency to judge a person as all good or all bad based on a certain characteristic or act. Therefore, by allowing the juries the access to the defendant’s past criminal records, there are the risk of the defendant being wrongly prosecuted without the proper evidence, as well as the risk of the real culprit being let loose to commit another crime.
On the other hand, some argue that the law denying the juries the access to the criminal records protects the assailant, not the victim. On 6th June 1993, Shiree Turner was brutally murdered, but the suspect charged with the murder was acquitted on the ground of insufficient evidence. It was only after the acquittal that the jury and the public learned that suspect had been charged with crimes of the same nature in the past. Much to the public devastation, the suspect-uncharged and unprosecuted- assaulted another victim. Thus, if the past criminal history of the suspect was admitted to the court as an evidence of the suspect’s repeated pattern of crimes, not only it would have brought justice to the Shiree Turner’s family but also it would have prevented further crimes by the suspect.
In conclusion, the jury should be allowed access to the defendant’s past criminal records, only if the records can be used as supportive evidences related to the current case. There have been a number of incidents where the court accepts the submission of the past criminal records as similar fact evidence or propensity evidence for child molestation and theft cases. Hence, it will be beneficial if the law permits the jury the access to the past criminal history with exception that it enables the jury to make a verdict in the favour of justice.
Top answer
It has been the norm that the juries in British and Australian courts are prohibited by law from reviewing the a defendant’s criminal history. However, some argue that in order for justice to be better served, the practice should be changed to allow the juries to have full access to the past any previous criminal record s. of the defendants, so that justice can be better exercised.
- It has been the norm that the juries in British and Australian courts are prohibited by law from reviewing the a defendant’s criminal history.
- However, some argue that in order for justice to be better served, the practice should be changed to allow the juries to have full access to the past any previous criminal record s.
- of the defendants, so that justice can be better exercised.
- This essay will discuss on whether or not the argue that past criminal records should be admitted admissible in the judicial proceedings.
- [you need to make your position clear].
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
It has been the norm that the juries in British and Australian courts are prohibited by law from reviewing the a defendant’s criminal history. However, some argue that in order for justice to be better served, the practice should be changed to allow the juries to have full access to the past any previous criminal records. of the def
00
Related Questions