There is no cast of a doubt on the fact
that some lawyers have suggested that the jury can not have access to the
information about the defendant’s past criminal records or crime activities. There is a controversy among different people about whether that the British and
Australian law does not give old information about his past criminal record has
ruined communication among the criminal’s prison sentence. I disagree with the contention that the law in question has destroyed the way of sentencing
the criminal to jail.
The first and foremost, disadvantages of the
idea of not having access to the defendant’s past criminal records is that the
jury’s or judges wont know how to equalize the final sentence which will lead
the judge or jury’s into an unfair final
result and they will not be able to know the truth of the criminals background. Moreover,
another con of the aforementioned idea is that more defendant’s will be in
danger if the criminal did not go to jail that will lead the criminal to get
revenge on the defender’s or his family
will be in danger in several different ways. For example, kidnapping the defendants
children or wife.
On
the other hand, the most important virtue of the idea in question is that the
government will not gain knowledge about everyone’s background and it’s a pro law for the past criminals so they can fix
their mistakes and live a normal life again by having a new job or family. I
concede that juries should have access to the defendants past criminal record’s,
but having access to the records does not mean that the government can not know
who is the criminal. To sum up, the government
should have access to all activities for every single one so they can provide safety
and the jury or judge can give the final dissension for defendant or
criminal.moreover, if the government follow the reasons the topic in hand they will provide safety and justice for the people
and the socity.
No comments:
Post a Comment