[Unknown Member]

Will jury be able give unbiased opinion on the defendant’s case, in case they have previous criminal records of him or with more information available with the jury, they will be able to take more informed decision? This intriguing question is being asked in every nook or corners of British and Australian law corridors. In my opinion, the current practice of not providing the past criminal record of the accused is unpalatable and this tradition needs to be quashed.

It is apparent that ultimately the right for making the judgement rests with the Judge and role of jury is to only provide their opinion based on the proceedings of the case. If jury has access to past records of the accused, they will be able to make more informed opinion and which will help the judge to decide the matter with more accuracy.

Moreover, jury will not be credulous to defendant’s lawyer, in case historical facts about the defendant are known to jury members and jury will be prevented from taking any arbitrary position. Additionally, knowing the holistic personality of the suspect, including past and present facts will provide complete picture to the jury, who will able to make a informed decision by connecting the missing links deduced from the background of the suspect. For example, if a suspect has a history of eve teasing and he is a suspect in the rape case, his past criminal records will be very crucial in deciding the matter.

In conclusion, I would reiterate that providing access to past criminal records of the defendant to the professionals deciding the case is vital. Therefore, above proposed alteration must be considered by British and Australian authorities.

[Unknown Member]

The jury, under British and Australian laws, is responsible for making the right decision against the person who is being confronted for a crime. Does the decision be made after taking into consideration the accused’s past criminal record? In my opinion, yes, and I will support my view with the help of the following paragraphs.

Indeed, Jury’s access to the defendant’s past criminal record will allow them to have a clear perspective. For instance, if the jury knows that a person, who is being accused of the theft, also has a past record of the same, the panel will contemplate before passing any verdict. Also, the old criminal records corroborate his/her crime. As a result, the chances of unbiased decisions increase. Not only this, if a culprit is aware that the jury has his/her old records, the person will be terrified before doing anything wrong.

On the other hand, if the panel is not provided with the old records, a criminal may be absolved in case of no proof as the jury will be making decisions on the basis of evidence only. This will protect the person and may motivate him/her to again do the crime. As a result, the jury will be responsible for making wrong decisions and hence it will question their integrity.

I would like to conclude by supporting the lawyers who are suggesting that the jury should be provided with all the past data of the accused as it is the responsibility of the panel to make the right decisions after looking at every aspect of the individual’s life.

[NIL Admin]

Excellently written. Structure is on point and lexical resources are used beautifully. Coherence and cohesion is maintained but still can be improved by including a few more cohesive devices.

One example is missing in the first body paragraph which is the only thing hurting your score.

One example is missing in the first body paragraph which is the only thing hurting your score.

Band score weightage: 5.0/6.0