Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

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? v.3

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. v. 3
Making the right decision is the mission of the judges so that it puts a huge pressure on them. The question whether to show the jury the previous criminal actions of the defendant has raised a conflict between lawmakers. In Britain and Australia, the jury is not informed those previous cases, but in other countries, these kinds of practices are used to advocate for the culprit. My personal view is that this acquaintance should be considered more carefully. Being provided past criminal record helps the judges to avoid the fraudulence from the lawyers and the defendant. When they know deeply about the character whom they have to give judgment, they would know whenever lawyers are cheating on them. In many cases, the defendant is a serial killer or a robber, understanding her or his past would help to create a background for her or his actions. Thus, the court could give out judgment quickly. On the other hand, it would be counterproductive to let the juries know the defendant’s past if it sets prejudice in their mind. There is no doubt that they would feel unfriendly towards to accused which may affect decision-making process. Furthermore, in reality, many crimes recognized their misdeeds in the past, and they do regret about that, desire to devote to society in order to expiate their sin. Preconception of the judges could lead to under-evaluate the effort of person with criminal records. That is totally unfair to the accused person when the court was for a recent crime but not for crime committed in the past even when that person was punished reasonably. In conclusion, let the court to access to information on the culprit should depend on the situation. It would an ideal choice to avoid time-consuming, but it also would have harmful effects on the juries’ view.
Making the right decision is the mission of the judges
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
so
that it puts a huge pressure on them.
Consider shortening this phrase to just "whether", or rephrase the sentence to avoid "The question".
The question whether
to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
show
the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
jury
the previous criminal actions of the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
defendant
has raised a conflict between lawmakers. In Britain and Australia, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
jury
is not informed those previous cases,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
in other countries, these kinds of practices are
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
used
to advocate for the culprit. My personal view is that this acquaintance should
be considered
more
carefully
.

Being provided
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
past
criminal record
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
helps
the judges to avoid the fraudulence from the lawyers and the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
defendant
. When they know
deeply
about the character whom they
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
have to
give judgment, they would know whenever lawyers are cheating on them. In
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
many
cases, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
defendant
is a serial killer or a robber, understanding her or his
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
past
would
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
help
to create a background for her or his actions.
Thus
, the court could give out judgment
quickly
.

On the other hand
, it would be counterproductive to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
let
the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
juries
know the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
defendant’s
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
past
if it sets prejudice in their mind. There is no doubt that they would feel
unfriendly
towards to accused which may affect decision-making process.
Furthermore
, in reality,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
many
crimes recognized their misdeeds in the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
past
, and they do regret about that, desire to devote to society in order to expiate their sin. Preconception of the judges could lead to under-evaluate the effort of person with criminal records.
That is
totally
unfair to the accused person when the court was for a recent crime
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
not for crime committed in the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
past
even when that person
was punished
reasonably
.

In conclusion
,
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
let
the court to access to information on the culprit should depend on the situation. It would an ideal choice to avoid time-consuming,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
it
also
would have harmful effects on the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
juries’
view.
7.5Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
7.5Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
7.5Mistakes
Learning is a treasure that will follow its owner everywhere.
Chinese Proverb

IELTS essay 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. v. 3

Essay
  American English
4 paragraphs
304 words
7.5
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 7.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 7.5
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 7.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 7.5
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Similar posts


Recent posts