• Best of luck to the class of 2019 for their HSC exams. You got this!

My legal essay, what do you think? (1 Viewer)

PatricianBrothers

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2016
Messages
2
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Hey guys, I have an essay for legal studies, this is the question.

Tell me if it's mint

Evaluate the effectiveness of the criminal investigation process as a means of achieving justice



The criminal investigation process has been highly ineffective at achieving justice for society, due to the Bail Act 1978 (NSW), which has made it possible for potential criminals to walk free in public, creating a threat to the society. This is balanced through the Law Enforcement Act 2002 (NSW), which allows police to have powers that enable them to protect society and the victims but also restricts them from abusing this power by putting safeguards such as warrants. The interrogation process provides justice and equity for all parties as a suspect can’t be interrogated for over four hours, but this can be extended with a court warrant, limiting the powers to the court's approval. The criminal investigation process does not meet the needs of society, rendering it useless as seen with the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (Cth), allowing people accused of terrorism to be held over a long period of time.

Firstly, it can be argued that the criminal investigation process does not reflect community standards and expectations, due to the Bail Act 1978, which approves the release of potential criminals into the society while a court case is happening. Under this Act, possible criminals are free to walk the street before or while a court case has commenced, putting the victim of the suspect and society in serious danger. In the case of R. v. David (2014), the suspect David was charged of assaulting and beating his wife, but was approved on bail, only to later the next day, break into his wife’s house and murder his wife in her sleep. Furthermore, Senior Constable James Whittaker stated that “The Bail Act is a ridiculous law, that needs to be reformed...our society doesn’t need to feel in danger that there are criminals walking freely”. (ABC | Daniel Smith) It must be deemed that the criminal investigation process has failed to reflect community standards and expectations, proving its ineffectiveness.



This is currently what I have, tell me what you think!

Thanks!
 
Last edited:

Jakulore

Active Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2015
Messages
341
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2016
I think that the base information and argument is solid, though I would work on better establishing my points. For the introduction, you have primarily focused on addressing random tidbits rather than outlining the basis for your response to the question at hand. If you do this, then go into what you have been doing (paragraphing based on the proposed points) I think you will have a more cohesive response.

Furthermore, you could note that the effectiveness of the Bail act varies over time. After all, the Bail Act 1978 (NSW) was considered groundbreaking at it's inception, and whilst it may not have maintained such effectiveness as the needs of the community changed, it was reformed through the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) in order to more effectively achieve justice. From this point, I suppose you could also mention that the goal of bail is to assess the degree of "unacceptable risk" present within each case in order to create justice based on the balance between the needs of the community and the just treatment of the offender.

It is good that you have integrated a media article, but of course do note that the Bail Act was reformed in 2013, so the content of the article/quote may not necessarily be applicable.

Overall though, I think that you are on the right track... Though I haven't looked at Legal Studies in over a month so don't take what I say word for word :)
 
Last edited:

PatricianBrothers

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2016
Messages
2
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
I think that the base information and argument is solid, though I would work on better establishing my points. For the introduction, you have primarily focused on addressing random tidbits rather than outlining the basis for your response to the question at hand. If you do this, then go into what you have been doing (paragraphing based on the proposed points) I think you will have a more cohesive response.

Furthermore, you could note that the effectiveness of the Bail act varies over time. After all, the Bail Act 1978 (NSW) was considered groundbreaking at it's inception, and whilst it may not have maintained such effectiveness as the needs of the community changed, it was reformed through the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) in order to more effectively achieve justice. From this point, I suppose you could also mention that the goal of bail is to assess the degree of "unacceptable risk" present within each case in order to create justice based on the balance between the needs of the community and the just treatment of the offender.

It is good that you have integrated a media article, but of course do note that the Bail Act was reformed in 2013, so the content of the article/quote may not necessarily be applicable.

Overall though, I think that you are on the right track... Though I haven't looked at Legal Studies in over a month so don't take what I say word for word :)
Thanks for the advice bro! I'll attempt to incorporate that once I've finished my essay completely, this is currently what i have now




The criminal investigation process has been highly ineffective at achieving justice for society, due to the Bail Act 1978 (NSW), which has made it possible for potential criminals to walk free in public, creating a threat to the society. This is balanced through the Law Enforcement Act 2002 (NSW), which allows police to have powers that enable them to protect society and the victims but also restricts them from abusing this power by putting safeguards such as warrants. The interrogation process provides justice and equity for all parties as a suspect can’t be interrogated for over four hours, but this can be extended with a court warrant, limiting the powers to the court's approval. The criminal investigation process does not meet the needs of victims, as seen with the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (Cth), allowing people accused of terrorism to be held over a long period of time.




Firstly, it can be argued that the criminal investigation process does not reflect community standards and expectations, due to the Bail Act 1978, which approves the release of potential criminals into the society while a court case is happening. Under this Act, possible criminals are free to walk the street before or while a court case has commenced, putting the victim of the suspect and society in serious danger. In the case of R. v. David (2014), the suspect David was charged of assaulting and beating his wife, but was approved on bail, only to later the next day, break into his wife’s house and murder his wife in her sleep. Furthermore, Senior Constable James Whittaker stated that “The Bail Act is a ridiculous law, that needs to be reformed...our society doesn’t need to feel in danger that there are criminals walking freely” (ABC | Daniel Smith) .It must be deemed that the criminal investigation process has failed to reflect community standards and expectations, proving its ineffectiveness at achieving justice.


Secondly, The Law Enforcement Act 2002 (NSW), enables the police to protect society but also balance individual rights, by restricting them abusing their own power, by placing safeguards such as warrants. The police may use 'reasonable force' to carry out their duties, under 'reasonable grounds' that a law has been broken. This Act is good for the society, but also protects individual suspects, by forcing the police to get a warrant to search suspects. In the case of R. v. Abdu. (2013), Abdu was found with acquitted of all drug charges, due to the police’s unlawful search, while in the case of R. v. Woods, he was convicted of all drug charges due to having a warrant. The Law Enforcement Act 2002 (NSW) clearly shows that the criminal investigation process achieves justice as it balances individual rights, and community rights.

Thirdly, the criminal investigation process can be seen as highly effective in achieving justice, as seen with the interrogation process, which is equitable and just for all parties. The interrogation process can keep a suspect kept in interrogation for 4 hours, but this can be extended with a court warrant, which limits the powers of the police. In the case of R. v. Williams (2011), Williams was accused and charged with murder, he was detained for four hours and without a court warrant to extend the interrogation process, a murderer would have been set free onto the street. Senior Constable James Bailey stated that “The interrogation process in NSW is highly effective, and and is fair to the victim and society” (SMH | 2014). The interrogation process has been highly effective at achieving justice, through the interrogation process.
 
Last edited:

zachary99

Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
60
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
I've look at this for one second and i recommend you dont write firstly, secondly etc. It's too basic if you want to score in that top band. :)
i scored 92 in legal.
 

caleb2160

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2016
Messages
10
Gender
Male
HSC
2017
Sorry if this is a little late, however there's still time before the Legal HSC Examination. A few things to fix:
1) "The criminal investigation process has been highly ineffective at achieving justice for society, due to the Bail Act 1978 (NSW)" wrong start. Yes it's good that you started saying your initial judgement, however you're too specific. Your intro should be something like this: "The criminal investigation process has been significantly ineffective in achieving justice for society.This is due to... also your language is informal. Using language such as "Highly" isn't recommended for an essay.
2) Sorry but you complete introduction structure is messed up. Introduction should include:
- Initial judgement
-Expansion a little (Might include one piece of legislation)
-Summary of points your gonna talk about
The introduction you made is more of a body paragraph. That won't cut it as it isn't introducing anything, it's arguing when your introduction should be introducing the points you're talking about.
A good sample introduction would look like this: Evaluate the effectiveness of the criminal investigation process as a means of achieving justice
"The criminal investigation process has been significantly ineffective as a means of achieving justice. This is due to the inadequacies present within the structure of the criminal investigation process. The law aims to promote fairness, equality and access, however the criminal investigation process has failed to meet the aims of the law. This is further represented by the Law Enforcement Act 2012 (Cth), displaying the in competencies of the police powers, reporting crime and the use of warrants.(
3) Apart from the badly made point for your body paragraph, your lcmd is severely lacking. You need at least, at bare minimum 1 legislation, 2-3 cases OR 2-3 media reports to establish a strong supported point. Your point shouldn't consist of "First" "Second" "Third" that's weak and informal. Look up band 6 essay examples to improve, because currently if I had to give your essay at this moment a mark out of 15 it would be 8/15. There's a lot more to improve on but I think the best thing to do would be to look up examples
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top