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?
To a certain extent I agree that a jury should have past criminal records to have many information. However, I also think that this thing will be unfair to accused person.
On the one hand, a jury should be allowed to access past criminal records because of some reasons. Firstly, they need to have enough information about the crimes. For example, they should know about criminal cases. Specifically, when the case happens, purposes of the criminal, relationship between the criminal and victims; therefore, a jury can understand characteristics as well as psychology of the crime. The jury can consider between past and current, then detect and give a appropriate conclusion. Moreover, this pratice can help to limit the number of criminals committing same rule many times, because if a jury does not have enough information, they can be cheated easily by kind appearance of criminal.
On the other hand, if a jury know more information but he does not have strongly deductive ability, he will make mistakes easily. Mainly because, he will be strongly affected by some things in the past and might omit important things in a current case. This leads to be unfair to accused person. They committed in the past but this does not mean they will continuously commit. We should consider them equally as well as give opportunities if they regretted and corrected their mistakes.
For the aforementioned reasons, I personally believed that a jury should be allowed to know past criminal record. However, they should consider carefullyand give appropriate judgements.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 83, Rule ID: MANY_FEW_UNCOUNTABLE[2]
Message: Use 'much' or 'little' with uncountable nouns.
Suggestion: much; little
...ould have past criminal records to have many information. However, I also think that...
^^^^
Line 1, column 83, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun information seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much information', 'a good deal of information'.
Suggestion: much information; a good deal of information
...ould have past criminal records to have many information. However, I also think that this thing ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hing will be unfair to accused person. On the one hand, a jury should be allowe...
^^^
Line 3, column 480, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... past and current, then detect and give a appropriate conclusion. Moreover, this ...
^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...easily by kind appearance of criminal. On the other hand, if a jury know more i...
^^^
Line 5, column 402, Rule ID: EQUALLY_AS[1]
Message: Don't say 'equally as'. You can use either 'equally' or 'as' on its own. When comparing two nouns, use 'just as'.
Suggestion: equally; as; just as
...nuously commit. We should consider them equally as well as give opportunities if they regr...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...egretted and corrected their mistakes. For the aforementioned reasons, I person...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, for example, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1321.0 1615.20841683 82% => OK
No of words: 255.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18039215686 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8845103304 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 176.041082164 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513725490196 0.561755894193 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 414.0 506.74238477 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 5.43587174349 221% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.6091608732 49.4020404114 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0666666667 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.93333333333 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.01903807615 139% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.350871355166 0.244688304435 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.133522593512 0.084324248473 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0834997611342 0.0667982634062 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2444322637 0.151304729494 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0566729933366 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.0946893788 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 78.4519038076 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.