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?

The laws of Britain and Australia state that the jury involved in a criminal case is given no access to background information about the defendant’s past criminal record.

This

as a matter of fact protects the person accused of the criminal charge against him. Few lawyers are of the opinion that

this

practice should be revised and the judging committee must be given access before they give their final verdict. I strongly agree with the group of lawyers that suggest understanding the past criminal records before having their final judgment on the accused. Certain crimes like theft, murders etc.

arise

Suggestion

Arise

from an understanding of the individual’s personality. A linkage

from

Suggestion

of

the past will bring light as to the understanding the accused at hand.

For example

: In the movie “The Green Mile” the accused was a man charged

on

Suggestion

with

false claims of him murdering two young girls. The truth

was

Suggestion

has been

just, that he was found beside the dead body of those children.

Although

with no excuse to hear, the officers handed him over to be hung to death. In

this

case only after his death did an official discover the truth.

On the other hand

a past sketch of the person with troubles through childhood or youth may stumble the decision of the jury.

This

can

further

aggravate the situation and turn the case against the accused. To conclude with, it is necessary to draw past activities to ascertain that the defendant is not wrongly held

for

Suggestion

in

the matter that he has been held account of.