The British And Australian Laws The Jury Has No Access To The Past Criminal Record Of The Defendant
The British And Australian Laws The Jury Has No Access To The Past Criminal Record Of The Defendant pRKjd
It is believed, and rightly so, that a person learns from his past and makes his future bright by correcting the mistakes committed in the past. Due to this, a person should not be judged, as a whole, by his past deeds only. Due the weightage must be accorded to the present circumstances in which the person commits an act, which may either give a positive or a negative result.
Different nations across the globe have a different set of rules in respect of criminal cases that come across the jury of such nation. The jury under the British and Australian laws has no access as regards the past criminal record of a defendant. This provides an edge to the defendant, as the jury comes to a decision in a vacuum. Moreover, in absence of previous criminal records the jury does not arrive at a decision due to any biasedness or pre-conceived notion about the character of the defendant. This situation, undoubtedly, favours the defendant.
However, another school of thought believes that the jury must be aware of the past criminal records of the defendant. According to the believers of this school, an access to the past criminal records, actually provides a factual, realistic and reasonable platform to the jury to deliver their judgment. The past records, as a matter of fact, provides the insight into nature, character, upbringing, social level, mental health and numerous other factors of the defendant. With the help of these tools, it becomes easy and logical for the jury to read the subconscious mind of such defendant. Moreover, it also facilitates the jury to take a reasoned, well defined, appropriate, conscious, deliberate, judicious and prudent decision.
As a matter of fact, in the recent case of a known gangster that made headlines in the criminal magazine, The ABC, it was only due to the knowledge of modus operandi of the said gangster in past records, that the jury overruled the theory of reasonable doubt that was illusioned by the advocate of the defendant.
In short, in my opinion, the jury must be made aware of the past records to provide them the opportunity to have a full 360-degree view of the defendant, as a whole. 
It  
is believed
, and  
rightly
  so
, that a person learns from his  
past
 and  
makes
 his future bright by correcting the mistakes committed in the  
past
.  
Due
 to this, a person should not  
be judged
, as a whole, by his  
past
 deeds  
only
.  
Due the
 weightage  
must
  be accorded
 to the present circumstances in which the person commits an act, which may either give a  
positive
 or a  
negative
 result. 
Different
 nations across the globe have a  
different
 set of  
rules
 in respect of  
criminal
 cases that  
come
 across the  
jury
 of such nation. The  
jury
 under the British and Australian laws has no access as regards the  
past
  criminal
  record
 of a  
defendant
. This  
provides
 an edge to the  
defendant
, as the  
jury
  comes
 to a decision in a vacuum.  
Moreover
, in absence of previous  
criminal
  records
 the  
jury
 does not arrive at a decision  
due
 to any  
biasedness
 or  
pre-conceived
 notion about the character of the  
defendant
. This situation,  
undoubtedly
,  
favours
 the defendant. 
However
, another school of  
thought
 believes that the  
jury
  must
 be aware of the  
past
  criminal
  records
 of the  
defendant
. According to the believers of this school,  
an access
 to the  
past
  criminal
  records
, actually  
provides
 a factual, realistic and reasonable platform to the  
jury
 to deliver their judgment. The  
past
  records
, as a matter of fact,  
provides
 the insight into nature, character, upbringing, social level, mental health and numerous other factors of the  
defendant
. With the  
help
 of these tools, it becomes easy and logical for the  
jury
 to read the subconscious mind of such  
defendant
.  
Moreover
, it  
also
 facilitates the  
jury
 to take a reasoned,  
well defined
, appropriate, conscious, deliberate, judicious and prudent decision.
As a matter of fact, in the recent case of a known gangster that made headlines in the  
criminal
 magazine, The ABC, it was  
only
  due
 to the knowledge of modus operandi of the said gangster in  
past
  records
, that the  
jury
 overruled the theory of reasonable doubt that was  
illusioned
 by the advocate of the defendant.
In short, in my opinion, the  
jury
  must
  be made
 aware of the  
past
  records
 to  
provide
 them the opportunity to have a full 360-degree view of the  
defendant
, as a whole.