+0

This is my second time writing for this topic cause the first sounded pretty much absurd. Could you have a look at this essay and evaluate it, please? I hope this would be better than the previous one.

---

Under British and Australian laws a jury in a criminal case has no access to information about the defendant’s past criminal record. This protects the person who is being accused of the crime.

Some lawyers have suggested that this practice should be changed and that a jury should be given all the past facts before they reach their decision about the case. Do you agree or disagree?

--

It is argued that the jury panel should have a right to get a solid grasp of previous crimes committed by defendants whose case they are looking into prior to the final verdict. I wholly agree that this is a necessity for more proper adjudication.

There are several reasons why I concur with the permission given to a jury that legitimizes their access to the record of the defendant’s past violations. Firstly, information from this data is indispensable to identify recidivism; therefore, reoffending convicts should receive heavier punishments. Secondly, the verdict reached is unlikely to hear objections from the plaintiff when past detail such as illegal acts of the defendant is taken into consideration. Finally, it is easier for a jury to deal with rogue individuals in society by noticing their repetitive involvement in criminal cases. For example, having those people be under close supervision and educational orientation of authorities could eliminate the potential extremists in the community.

Moreover, criminal records are of paramount importance in documenting illegal activities of a person that function as a wake-up call for offenders. Having a list of committing crimes in profile might be compared to a mirror helping lawbreakers gain motivations to turn over a new leaf eventually. Provided that this record is not disclosed in courts, it's behavioural correcting and alerting effects would become more resonance than power. To illustrate this, the soaring crimes rate could be foreshadowed because past crimes are now immaterial to the judgement. In other words, the defendant’s criminal record should be given to the jury panel to not only appropriately sentence the repeating wrongdoers but also maintain the essence of this specific record.

In conclusion, I do believe that it is plausible for having legislation allowing a jury to know about the criminal past of the defendants before they reach a unanimous verdict on the case.

---

Thank you.

+0

Please post essays, paragraphs, dialogues and other writing in the essay forum so a moderator does not have to move your post.
https://www.englishforums.com/English/EssayReportCompositionWriting/Forum9.htm

Please do not put the essay instructions in the "Subject" line.
Put it with your answer in the message body.

Subject: Please review my IELTS essay

Message body:
Topic: Copy all the instructions here.

My essay:

(Your text here...)
---------------------


Are you the same person as Elysia Ng?

Please do not post under two different accounts. Pick one that you want to use.

+0

The main problem is that you do not have enough background information to answer this topic fairly. It is not a good topic for you to write on.

The jury does not assess the sentence of a defendant, so most of your arguments are not valid. They hear the evidence for one particular incident, and decide only one thing: guilty or not guilty. There may be several charges, but they make that decision for each individual charge.

This is from a website on UK courts.

If the jury find the defendant guilty then the judge will decide on an appropriate sentence. The sentence will be influenced by a number of factors: principally the circumstances of the case, the impact that the crime has had on the victim, and relevant law especially guideline cases from the Court of Appeal. The judge will equally take into account the mitigation and any reports and references on the defendant. Only once the judge has considered all of these factors will the appropriate sentence or punishment be pronounced.


It is argued that the jury panel should have a right to get a solid grasp of previous crimes committed by defendants whose cases they are looking into hearing prior to the final verdict. I wholly agree that this is a necessity for more proper adjudication.

There are several reasons why I concur with the giving permission given to a jury that legitimizes their access to (The jury is not going to some database and accessing the history of accusations; the prosecutor will reveal this information during the trial.) the record of the defendant’s past violations. Firstly, First, this information from this data is indispensable to identify recidivism; therefore, reoffending convicts should receive heavier punishments. (The jury only determines guilt or innocence for the particular case being tried. Your point is not a valid one..) Secondly, Second, the verdict reached is unlikely to hear objections from the plaintiff (Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant has any right to object to the jury's decision. It is final. ) when past details such as illegal acts of the defendant is are taken into consideration. Finally, it is easier for a jury to deal with rogue individuals in society by noticing their repetitive involvement in criminal cases. For example, having those people be under close supervision and educational orientation of authorities (That does not make sense. If the defendant gets a prison sentence, they will be under close supervisions, won't they?) could eliminate the potential extremists in the community.

Moreover, criminal records are of paramount importance in documenting illegal activities of a person that function as a wake-up call for offenders. (I do not understand. Are you saying that the criminal has no idea of his past crimes? The members of the jury are not lawbreakers. ) Having a list of committing crimes in profile might be compared to a mirror helping lawbreakers gain motivations be motivated to turn over a new leaf eventually. Provided that this record is not disclosed in courts, it's behavioural correcting and alerting effects would become more resonance than power. (I do not understand this sentence at all.) To illustrate this, the soaring crime crimes rate could be foreshadowed because past crimes are now immaterial to the judgement. In other words, the defendant’s criminal record should be given to the jury panel to not only appropriately sentence the repeating wrongdoers (But the jury does not give the sentence. The judge does this, and the judge has all the information. The question is should the jury focus only on the circumstances and evidence for this one particular crime, or should they be given more background information on the defendant? ) but also maintain the essence of this specific record.

(I do not know what you mean.)


In conclusion, I do believe that it is plausible for having legislation allowing a jury to know about the criminal past of the defendants before they reach a unanimous verdict on the case.


Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Comments  

Thank you again for helping me out with these corrections. I agree that this topic is just not for me, but it's frightened me that this is going to be one of the potential topics in the IELTS exam.

what I mean by the second paragraph is that the criminal record could not do justice to its function if people keep ignoring it in trials. Would you mind if I ask for some ideas, like proper topic sentences to write about this topic?

Thanks a bunch. I truly appreciate it.

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Nờ Nờ Gia Hânis that the criminal record could not do justice to its function

What is the function of a criminal record?

Certainly it does not do anything good for the defendant.

Nờ Nờ Gia HânWould you mind if I ask for some ideas, like proper topic sentences to write about this topic?

I would not take your viewpoint. I would argue the opposite.

yes, I am Elysia Ng. , I forgot my password and have to access the site through Facebook so it changed my name.