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?

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.