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? GIVE REASONS FOR YOUR ANSWER AND INCLUDE ANY RELEVANT EXAMPLES FROM YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE.

IN SOME COUNTRIES

SUCH

AS AUSTRALIA AND BRITISH, JURIES ARE NOT ABLE TO REVIEW DELINQUENCES‘ BACKGROUND SINCE IT IS PROHIBITED.

HOWEVER

, SOME LAWYERS RECOMMEND FOR THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM TO CHANGE IT GIVEN THAT IT WAS NOT BANNED IN THE PAST. I COMPLETE DISAGREE WITH AUTHORITIES ALLOWING TO CHANGE

THIS

LAW BECAUSE KNOWING

PEOPLE

’S RECORDS MIGHT BRING AN INFLUENCE ON THE CURRENT CASE AS WELL AS IMPACT DRAMATICALLY ON ACCUSED’S LIVES.

FIRST

OFF, ONE OF THE MAIN REASON IS THAT THE JURY MIGHT MAKE MISTAKE DURING THE PROCESS SINCE THEY CAN FEEL INFLUENCED BY OFFENDER'S RECORDS. TO ILLUSTRATE, PERHAPS, THERE IS NO REAL EVIDENCE TO SENTENCE A PERSON AS GUILTY, BUT IF THE JUDY STARTS REVIEWING THE CRIMINAL PAST AND FOUND THAT

THIS

PERSON USED TO GET INTO TROUBLE, THE JUDY’S DECISIONS COULD BE AFFECTED (RATHER THAN DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT

THIS

PERSON IS TO BLAME TO THE ACTUAL PROCESS).

THEREFORE

, CHANGING

THIS

LAW WILL HAVE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES FOR

PEOPLE

THAT ARE INNOCENTS BECAUSE THEY MIGHT BE SENTENCED DUE TO THE JUDY’S PERSONAL BIAS.

LIKEWISE

, ANOTHER ARGUMENT AGAINST CHANGING

THIS

LAW IS THAT MANY

PEOPLE

COMMITTING CRIMES HAVE BEING REHABILITATED INTO SOCIETY SUCCESSFULLY. THEY ARE WORKING ABIDE BY THE RULES SO, EXPOSING THEIR PAST COULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THEM SINCE THEY COULD BE DISCRIMINATED.

FOR INSTANCE

, I KNOW SOME

PEOPLE

THAT WERE IN JAIL WHEN THEY WERE TEENAGERS OUT OF PEER PRESSURE.

HOWEVER

, WHEN THEY STAYED IN JAIL, THEY REFLECT ON THEIR BEHAVIOR AND BECAME BETTER

PEOPLE

THANKS TO THE SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE RECEIVED. MANY HAVE A DECENT JOB NOW SO, SHOWING THEIR PAST MAY DRAW

PEOPLE

’S ATTENTION SINCE THE INFORMATION MIGHT BE SPREAD EASILY,

THUS

MAKING MORE CITIZENS START CRITICIZED THEM. TO SUM UP, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE SOME REASONS WHY SOME LAWYERS CONSIDER THAT LAWS SHOULD BE MODIFIED WHEN IT COMES TO KNOWING ABOUT CRIMINAL'S BACKGROUND, I ARGUE THAT A JUDY CANNOT JUDGE

PEOPLE

BY THEIR CRIMINAL RECORD, THEY MUST FOCUS ONLY ON THE ACTIONS AND FACTS OF THE CURRENT CASE NO MATTER WHAT.