Essay On Prior Convictions

Recent arguments have arisen discussing whether or not juries should be provided with prior criminal records of accused offenders. While some people might argue that this information should be fully disclosed, I believe that prior convictions should have no bearing on current accusations. First, everyone should be provided with impartial judgement. Second, you need evidence to convict. Finally, ex-criminals have a hard enough time going straight without prior records haunting them. First, perhaps the strongest reason to deter prior records becoming available to juries is that everyone should be entitled to impartial judgement. If jurors have access to previous criminal records they would develop a bias and “normal people” are bias against criminals at the best of times. Limiting the information would give jurors a better chance of providing an impartial verdict, and at the same time giving the accused a better chance at getting an outcome they
“Innocent until proven guilty” is what our judicial system is based on. Not “innocent based on prior convictions”. Basing a verdict on a person’s prior convictions is just unfair. Everyone should be entitled to a fair trial based on evidence gathered that is related to the crime at hand. If suspects continue to be judge on prior convictions it would make it very hard for them to make positives steps forward. Finally, criminals have a hard time “going straight” without their past haunting them. Having convictions you have been guilty for in the past determine the outcome of a trial that you’re facing in the present, is unfair. If the defendant is innocent, and is trying their best to make good decisions, they should have a fair impartial trial to give them the best chance of rehabilitation, not one that is based on their past. Having a trial like this I believe will encourage the respondent to work towards a bright