Present a written argument or case to an educated non-specialist audience on the following topic: 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 law in

both

the United

kingdom

Correct your spelling

Kingdom

show examples

and Australia prohibits

juries

to get information on the defendant's past criminal records by doing

this

they believe it protects offenders from being accused and

giving

Wrong verb form

gives

show examples

them a fair verdict ,

however

, some lawyers think it's more reasonable to get the full picture before making the final decision , I personally agree with the

last

statement as knowing the past , can provide more fairness those who were never involved in criminal activity and

also

give the

juries

better prospective on the situation .

To begin

with , when someone has in the past had a criminal

recored

Correct your spelling

record

they shouldn't be treated like those who

commited

Correct your spelling

committed

commit

crimes for the first time as they should get an additional punishment for breaking laws twice or as many times as they did ,

thus

,

its

Replace the word

it's

it is

show examples

essential to get a

recored

Correct your spelling

record

recorded

for the past facts ,

for instance

, if 2 different people were to

assult

Correct your spelling

assault

2 others and they

both

got the same amount of

damge

Correct your spelling

damage

done, but the first had

covicted

Correct your spelling

convicted

many crimes

whereas

the other has a clean record the first should be sentenced to more time as he didn't learn from his past mistakes

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

if

this

hypothetical case were to happen in

both

the

contries

Correct your spelling

countries

we're talking about it

woudn't

Correct your spelling

wouldn't

be fair for the second person with no past

crime

Replace the word

criminal

show examples

records .

In addition

, knowing the

persons

Change to a genitive case

person's

persons'

show examples

history can give those making the

desicion

Correct your spelling

decision

a better view because in many cases it's difficult for the

juries

Fix the agreement mistake

jury

show examples

to give the right and fair choice ,

therefore

, having all the past actions can help clear things

and

Change preposition

up and

show examples

make the final call , based the example provided in the

last

paragraph , it would be easier to provide justice if they knew the past ,

on the other hand

, if they were

both

presented to the

juries

with not mentioning there past convictions it would be harder for them to make up

there

Replace the word

their

show examples

minds as they might consider that one may have never

commited

Correct your spelling

committed

somthing

Correct your spelling

something

bad

while

the other did ,

thererfore

Correct your spelling

therefore

, they might start thinking that justice is not going to get served .

To sum up

,

its

Replace the word

it's

it is

show examples

crucial for ,

juries

to put

in

Change preposition

into

show examples

consideration the past events of criminals as it provides them with more evidence

wich

Correct your spelling

which

show examples

can help come up

the

Change preposition

with the

show examples

right saying about

there

Replace the word

their

show examples

crimes and will

also

give offer justice to those who have no past flaws .