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. You should write at least 250 words.

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. You should write at least 250 words.

According to British and Australia rights and regulations, a jury in a criminal case has no link to information about the defendent's previous criminal record. However, some lawers have believed that this procedure should be modified so that a jury should be provided all the essential information before they give out their final choice. In my perspective, i believe a jury should be provided all the past facts about the defendent.
On the one hand, without the access to information about the defendent's past criminal record, a jury can have a insight about the person right in front of them about whether they are good or not through their behaviours and words. However, a jury cannot fully comprehend the personalities and behaviours of the defendent which may cause some misunderstandings toward them during the judgement period. This can make a jury believe that the defendent is innocent through the fake movements and emotions expressions although the individual in front of them might be a serial killer. This case has happened in the past when Ted Bundy, one of the most terrifying murderers in the entire human history, has tricked many female individuals belong to a jury with his handsome-looking face making them believe that he is innocent and his actions was just self-defense.
On the other hand, when a jury has full access to the information about the defendent's childhood events, relationships and achievements, they can have a deeper understanding toward the defendent. They may feel sympathy about the event that the defendent has to suffered making them the person they are now or frustrating about the evil deeds that they have done. A jury may then have a different perspective about the current criminal case which can aid them reach their decision with a more thoughtful choice.
In conclusion, there are both advantages and disadvantges about the defendent's past criminal record being exposed to a jury. Nevertheless, i believe that the merits outweight the drawbacks.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

1. "lawers" -> "legal professionals"
   Explanation: "Lawers" is a misspelling of "lawyers." "Legal professionals" is a more formal and precise term for individuals involved in legal matters.

2. "defendent’s" -> "defendant’s"
   Explanation: "Defendent’s" is a misspelling of "defendant’s." "Defendant’s" is the correct possessive form in this context.

3. "should be modified" -> "should be amended"
   Explanation: "Modified" is a common term, but "amended" is more formal and appropriate in legal contexts, aligning better with academic style.

4. "perspective, i believe" -> "perspective; I believe"
   Explanation: Separating the clauses with a semicolon and capitalizing "I" improves punctuation and maintains formality.

5. "insight about" -> "insight into"
   Explanation: "Insight about" is colloquial; "insight into" is the more formal and appropriate preposition to use in this context.

6. "good or not" -> "innocent or guilty"
   Explanation: "Good or not" is overly simplistic and informal. "Innocent or guilty" is more precise and legally relevant.

7. "misunderstandings toward them" -> "misunderstandings regarding them"
   Explanation: "Towards" is less formal than "regarding." "Regarding" is more appropriate in academic writing.

8. "fake movements and emotions expressions" -> "deceptive movements and emotional expressions"
   Explanation: "Fake" is informal; "deceptive" is a more formal and precise term. Also, "emotions expressions" is redundant; "emotional expressions" suffices.

9. "believe that the defendent is innocent" -> "mistakenly believe the defendant is innocent"
   Explanation: Adding "mistakenly" clarifies that the belief is incorrect, enhancing precision and academic tone.

10. "the entire human history" -> "recorded human history"
    Explanation: "The entire human history" is too informal. "Recorded human history" is a more precise and formal term.

11. "individuals belong to a jury" -> "individuals serving on a jury"
    Explanation: "Belong to a jury" is awkward. "Serving on a jury" is more appropriate and formal.

12. "he is innocent and his actions was just self-defense" -> "he was innocent and his actions were justified as self-defense"
    Explanation: Correcting subject-verb agreement and using "justified" instead of "just" enhances clarity and formal tone.

13. "access to the information" -> "access to information"
    Explanation: "The" is unnecessary and overly wordy in this context.

14. "childhood events" -> "personal history"
    Explanation: "Childhood events" is too broad and informal. "Personal history" is more specific and formal.

15. "merits outweight" -> "merits outweigh"
    Explanation: "Outweight" is a misspelling of "outweigh." Correcting the spelling improves accuracy and clarity.

These changes enhance the essay’s academic tone and clarity while maintaining its natural flow.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 9

Band Score for Task Response: 9

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses both aspects of the prompt: the current practice of withholding the defendant’s past criminal record from the jury and the argument for or against changing this practice. The writer discusses both perspectives and ultimately presents a clear opinion.
  • How to improve: While the essay covers the main points, it could benefit from a more structured approach. Each paragraph should focus on a specific aspect, such as the current practice, arguments for change, and arguments against change, to enhance clarity and organization.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The writer maintains a clear stance throughout the essay, expressing agreement with the idea that juries should have access to the defendant’s past criminal record. The position is evident from the introduction to the conclusion.
  • How to improve: To strengthen the clarity of the position, the writer could use stronger language to assert their viewpoint and avoid ambiguous statements that might undermine the strength of their argument.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks in-depth development and support. While examples are provided, such as the reference to Ted Bundy, they are not thoroughly analyzed or connected back to the main argument.
  • How to improve: To enhance the quality of ideas, the writer should elaborate on each point, providing more detailed explanations and evidence to support their claims. Additionally, using a wider range of examples and incorporating relevant statistics or research findings could strengthen the argument.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic but occasionally veers off track, particularly in the second paragraph where the discussion shifts to the defendant’s childhood events and relationships. While this information is relevant to the argument, the connection to the main topic could be clearer.
  • How to improve: To ensure better coherence and relevance, the writer should maintain a stronger link between the discussion of the defendant’s past criminal record and its impact on jury decision-making. Avoiding tangential discussions will help maintain focus on the main argument.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the prompt and presents a well-structured argument. To improve, the writer should focus on enhancing clarity, depth of analysis, and relevance of examples to further strengthen their response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 9

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 9

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a clear organizational structure with distinct introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each paragraph is focused on presenting a different perspective on the issue: the first body paragraph discusses the potential disadvantages of not disclosing the defendant’s past criminal record, while the second body paragraph presents the advantages of providing this information to the jury. This logical organization allows the reader to easily follow the progression of ideas from one paragraph to the next.
  • How to improve: To further enhance logical organization, consider refining the topic sentences of each paragraph to clearly outline the main point being discussed. Additionally, ensure that transitions between paragraphs are seamless to maintain the coherence of the essay.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively utilizes paragraphs to structure its argument. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the topic, with clear topic sentences introducing the main idea of the paragraph. However, there are some instances of run-on sentences and repetitive phrases that could be revised for clarity and coherence.
  • How to improve: Break down lengthy sentences into shorter, more concise ones to improve readability. Additionally, aim for variety in sentence structure to maintain reader engagement. Consider revising repetitive phrases to avoid monotony and enhance the overall flow of the essay.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate use of cohesive devices to connect ideas and enhance coherence. For instance, transition phrases such as "On the one hand" and "On the other hand" effectively signal shifts between contrasting viewpoints. However, there is room for improvement in diversifying the types of cohesive devices used, such as conjunctions, pronouns, and lexical cohesion.
  • How to improve: Integrate a wider range of cohesive devices throughout the essay to strengthen the connections between sentences and paragraphs. Utilize cohesive devices such as "Furthermore," "Moreover," and "In addition" to add depth to the argument and improve overall coherence. Additionally, ensure consistency in pronoun usage to maintain clarity and cohesion within the essay.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates strong coherence and cohesion, there are opportunities for refinement in terms of paragraph structure, sentence clarity, and the diversity of cohesive devices used. By implementing these suggestions, the essay can further enhance its effectiveness in presenting a well-organized and cohesive argument.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 9

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 9

• Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of vocabulary, incorporating terms such as "regulations," "comprehend," "misunderstandings," "sympathy," "frustrating," and "advantages." These words contribute to the depth and variety of the language used.
  • How to improve: While the essay showcases a strong lexical resource, further diversification and sophistication of vocabulary could enhance the overall richness of expression. Introducing more nuanced synonyms or exploring different word forms can elevate the sophistication of language use.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally employs vocabulary effectively to convey meaning, such as in the use of "misunderstandings," "sympathy," and "advantages." However, there are instances of imprecise language, such as the phrase "good or not" which lacks specificity, and the repetition of "defendent" instead of the correct spelling "defendant."
  • How to improve: To enhance precision, it’s important to avoid vague terms and opt for more precise alternatives. For instance, instead of "good or not," the essay could use terms like "innocent or guilty" to convey a clearer meaning. Additionally, paying attention to correct spelling, particularly of key terms like "defendant," is crucial for maintaining clarity and professionalism.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: While the essay generally maintains coherence, there are several instances of misspellings, such as "lawers" instead of "lawyers," "defendent" instead of "defendant," and "advantages" misspelled as "advantges." These errors detract from the overall quality of the writing.
  • How to improve: Employing proofreading techniques, such as reading the essay aloud or using spell-check tools, can help identify and correct spelling errors. Additionally, familiarizing oneself with common spelling patterns and practicing spelling regularly can contribute to improved accuracy in written expression.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a strong command of vocabulary, there is room for improvement in terms of precision and spelling accuracy. By refining language usage and ensuring correct spelling, the essay can achieve a higher level of sophistication and clarity.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 9

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 9

• Use a Wide Range of Structures:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For example, there are instances of complex sentences such as "However, a jury cannot fully comprehend the personalities and behaviors of the defendant which may cause some misunderstandings toward them during the judgment period." Additionally, varied transitional phrases like "On the one hand," "On the other hand," and "In conclusion" contribute to coherence and sophistication.
  • How to improve: To further enhance variety, consider incorporating more complex sentence structures, such as using relative clauses or participial phrases. Introducing rhetorical devices like parallelism or inversion can also elevate the essay’s complexity.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates proficient grammatical accuracy. However, there are several instances of grammatical errors and punctuation inconsistencies throughout the text. For instance, "According to British and Australia rights and regulations" should be "According to British and Australian laws." Additionally, there are instances of subject-verb agreement errors ("some lawers have believed" should be "some lawyers have suggested") and punctuation errors (e.g., missing commas after introductory phrases).
  • How to improve: Proofreading the essay thoroughly can help identify and correct these errors. Pay particular attention to subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and proper comma usage. Additionally, consider seeking feedback from peers or utilizing grammar-checking tools to improve accuracy. Developing a habit of revising and editing essays systematically can significantly enhance grammatical precision.

Bài sửa mẫu

According to British and Australian laws, a jury in a criminal case is not privy to information about the defendant’s prior criminal record. However, some legal professionals suggest that this practice should be amended so that a jury can be fully informed before making their decision. In my perspective, I believe a jury should have access to all the relevant facts about the defendant.

On one hand, without access to information about the defendant’s past criminal record, a jury can only rely on their observations of the defendant’s behavior and words. However, this may not provide a complete understanding of the defendant’s character, leading to potential misunderstandings. There have been cases where deceptive movements and emotional expressions have misled juries into mistakenly believing the defendant is innocent, as seen in the example of Ted Bundy, one of the most notorious murderers in recorded human history, who managed to manipulate jurors with his charming demeanor.

On the other hand, when a jury is provided with comprehensive information about the defendant’s personal history, including their childhood events, relationships, and achievements, they can develop a deeper understanding of the individual. This can elicit empathy for the defendant’s past experiences or frustration with their actions, leading to a more nuanced perspective on the current criminal case and aiding the jury in reaching a thoughtful decision.

In conclusion, while there are both advantages and disadvantages to exposing the defendant’s past criminal record to a jury, I believe that the merits outweigh the drawbacks. Giving the jury access to relevant information can lead to a fairer and more informed decision-making process.