-
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.
