There is a debate among civilians regarding the
jury
getting authorisation to go through the defendant's past criminal past. Many give different opinions from various perspectives as some support the statements and some disagree. There are opinions stating that the action can lead to an invasion of the accused's privacy and having no information on past records can help the Use synonyms
jury
to make an unbiased decision.
Use synonyms
Firstly
, giving authorisation to the Linking Words
jury
to access to culprit's past is an invasion of an individual's privacy. Even if, the defendant was being questioned in the law court, giving accessibility to a Use synonyms
jury
that consists of sworn people can increase the chances of the data being leaked to the public. Jurors can accidentally bring up the case and the accused's information outside the law court Use synonyms
such
as the accused's past history and personal data, Linking Words
for instance
. Linking Words
Hence
, Linking Words
this
can cause the culprit unable to continue a normal life after they redeem themselves.
Linking Words
Furthermore
, having no clue about a criminal's past record can help the bureau make unbiased verdicts. It is important to note that, jurors need to make a verdict upon the offender's guilty based only on the evidence that has been presented in the law court without being tied by the accused's past mistakes. Linking Words
For example
, the bureau was able to the defendant's consequences and emotions as they were unaware of the culprit's criminal past. Linking Words
Hence
, Linking Words
this
gives chance to offender to prove their innocence during the hearing.
In conclusion, the accessibility of the board to criminal records can lead to privacy invasion and unknowing the history can help the bureau to make unbiased decisions. In my opinion, I disagree with the fact that the Linking Words
jury
should get all the past history of the case.Use synonyms
farahhuzaimee