Under British and Australian laws, the past histories of suspects are protected from the jury during trials. Some lawyers argue that this should be changed so that juries can access the criminal records before making final decisions. I strongly believe that juries should have information about a suspect’s history. This information can prevent misjudgments of dangerous criminals and give people a chance to restart their lives if they have behaved well in the past.
Firstly, disclosing criminal records to the jury is essential because a suspect could be very dangerous, and society cannot afford for juries to make incorrect decisions. Without access to past information, a defendant could pretend to be innocent and persuade the jury to impose lighter sentences. If this strategy succeeds, it could endanger the public as dangerous criminals can easily be released from prison and continue to harm others. For example, case studies have shown many repeat drunk drivers who have killed innocent people while driving under the influence and continue to offend after being released from prison.
On the other hand, revealing the criminal histories of offenders can also protect first-time suspects of minor crimes. Mistakes are sometimes made due to various circumstances, such as facing difficult life situations when making decisions. It is essential for individuals to face the consequences of their actions, but as long as they are not harmful and have no prior criminal record, I believe everyone deserves a second chance. There are also stories of individuals who have reformed, turned their lives around, and even started helping others after deeply regretting and completing their penalties.
In conclusion, this essay strongly supports the idea that juries should have access to criminal records. This access can help juries make appropriate sentencing decisions for dangerous criminals and provide first-time offenders and minor criminals with a second chance.