Please rate my answer for Legal Studies? (3 Viewers)

[Phoebe 123]

The question is "Discuss the role of discretion in the criminal justice system." This is my answer:

Discretion in the criminal justice system refers to the power of the police, the prosecutor, and the judge/magistrate and the jury to make informal decisions about factors if there is enough evidence to prosecute someone, or to arrest someone. It is necessary and vital for the criminal justice system because the whole facts need to be looked at before making an allegation against someone. A breach of this would be seen as an inconsideration of the law and the facts. Police exercise discretion everyday; when they see a car speeding, they wish to issue a speeding ticket or a warning. That is an decision to issue an caution When they suspect any kind of breach of the law, they have to make informed decisions about whether to take it further; this decision will depend on factors such as the severity of the crime, the circumstances surrounding the crime, and if there is enough cause to take it further. When investigating a crime, police may wish to dismiss their investigation. This is often because of a struggle to find evidence to arrest the suspect, or of the severity. For less serious offenses, police may simply issue a warning or a caution, and if it is done repititively, police will usually arrest the offender so the matter goes to court. In all cases, the jury plays a huge part in what will happen to the offender, as the defendant’s fate pretty much lies in their hands as what they decide will seal the fate of the arrestee. It is extremely important that the jury looks at both sides of the argument impartially and carefully and makes a wise decision which considers all the evidence and circumstances, not doing so may result in a miscarriage of justice. Discretion gives the power to the prosecutor of dismissing a case against the defendant on factors such as the probability of getting a conviction, the nature of the offense, characteristics of the offender, or if the defense has outclassed their case. In conclusion, the decisions or otherwise called discretion that the jury, the judge, police make play an huge impact on parties of the offenses lives, and it is extremely important that it is not breached or abused by all parties in the criminal justice system to avoid a miscarriage of justice.


How can I improve this to maximise marks?

 

[enoilgam]

Your answer is not that bad, however you have made one major mistake which most HSC students make in humanities subjects. Your answer is more a description as opposed to a discussion. You have given a discussion in some areas, but most of it seems to be describing the discretionary powers given to police, judges etc. Also,you also dont use examples/cases/legislation.

As this is a HSC question from 2009, I'll refer you to the markers comments on this section - "Better responses concentrated on contemporary examples, cases and legislation. The benefits and disadvantages of discretion with reference to reporting crime and police and judicial discretion were evident in better responses. Weaker responses demonstrated limited understanding of discretion and many concentrated on interactions between individuals and the police."

Considering this, I'd probably give you a three out of six (I believe the q was out of 6, although I'm not 100% sure)

 

[Phoebe 123]

So to improve I could have used examples of cases where there have been miscarriages of justice?

 

[enoilgam]

Yes and also, you need to discuss discretion instead of describing it. Like, talk about the advantages and disadvantages of discretion, whether discretion is a good thing or a bad thing, is the discretion afforded to police, judges etc excessive, or not enough etc.

 

[Phoebe 123]

But haven't I talked about some advantages when I said that a miscarriage of discretion can result in a miscarriage of justice...?

 

[Phoebe 123]

Btw, could disadvantages of discretion include

-Police often abuse their power in regards to discretion
-There is conflict in society with juries having such a strong impact on the defendant's fate, considering that they are just normal people that been picked out randomly, with no strong knowledge in regards to the legal system. It may be argued that is not right to give them such a big impact in regards to discretion.


And...can't think of anything else.

 

[enoilgam]

Btw, could disadvantages of discretion include

-Police often abuse their power in regards to discretion
-There is conflict in society with juries having such a strong impact on the defendant's fate, considering that they are just normal people that been picked out randomly, with no strong knowledge in regards to the legal system. It may be argued that is not right to give them such a big impact in regards to discretion.


And...can't think of anything else.

Thats along the lines of what you need to say. Like I said before, you have done some discussion, but it is mostly a description of the process. What is your aim in legal if you dont mind me asking?

 

[Phoebe 123]

Nothing much; just to do well in it.

 

[enoilgam]

Nothing much; just to do well in it.

Well good luck with legal. It can be a tough subject. My advice to you would be to bring more discussion into your work, if you can do that you could really start hitting the big marks because you write quite well and you seem to have a strong knowledge of the course content.

 

[Phoebe 123]

Ok, so discussion includes for this question

-Talk about more advantages/disadvantages
-Past cases
-Legislation (I am confused about this one. What does legislation have to do with this? Do you mean like giving example of laws that have been enforced to make sure parties in the legal system don't abuse their power or other inappropriate actions?

So basically to talk about WHY discretion is important, not just the main roles of the jury, judge/magistrate, etc.

 

[enoilgam]

In this question, you probably wouldnt have to refer to legislation as much, but you might want to reference it in passing e.g. mention that the police get their discretion from the LEPRA Act. Talk about advantages, disadvantages the importance of the discretion etc. However, try and remember not to do too many things in your response and overload it.

If you decide to try this question again, I'd be more then happy to give it another look.

 

[Phoebe 123]

How about this question

"Outline the criminal process from a crime being reported to a sentence being given."

I am not going to make a whole parragraph about this, but are these the correct main steps?

1. A crime is reported to the police
2. Police investigate
3. Evidence turns up, a warrant is issued and the parties are arrested.
4. The offender is held in custody until a preliminary hearing.
5. In this preliminary hearing, the defendant must choose to plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead guilty, a sentence is arranged immediatly. If they plead guilty, the matter goes to a trial.
6. The offender is held in prison unless they can afford bail.
7. During the trial, the prosecutor and the defense must present their arguments to an impartial judge and jury.
8. After the hearing, the jury weighs up both sides of the evidence and presents a verdict.
9. The next step depends on the juries verdict. If they have the defendant not guilty, the offender is acquitted, usually will instead have to serve community service. If they find the defendant guilty, then a hearing is immediately arranged to sentence the offender.

I am aware this has many holes. But this was stated in the syllabus and was an past HSC question, and I can't find it anywhere.

 

[enoilgam]

If you were to describe all that in your answer, you would get close to full marks. Since this is an outline question, all you have to do is describe the process - no analysis is needed.

 

[Phoebe 123]

So all steps are correct then? I haven't left anything out?

 

[enoilgam]

Its all there. Just in the last step, you say people found not guilty can be given community service. If your innocent you dont recieve any punishment.

 

[erespall]

heres a generic effectiveness/discuss thing to implement in your responses. Also, try to have a balanced response. look at pro's and cons and discuss the effectiveness of whatever your talking about (depending on the question). For this i use CRAPEE as my criteria. see below. XD hope this helps

1: LCMS

L: Legislation
C: Cases
M: Media
S: Stats

2: CRAPEE (easiest shit to remember. get crappy with your responses!)

C: Compliance
R: Resource efficiency
A: Access
P: Protection
E: Equality
E: Enforcement

 

[Phoebe 123]

Its all there. Just in the last step, you say people found not guilty can be given community service. If your innocent you dont recieve any punishment.

So describing that whole process will give me full marks? If not, then I have obviously not doing something right.

 

[Phoebe 123]

Also, when referring to past cases, do they have to be all Australian? Can they be from America?

 

[enoilgam]

So describing that whole process will give me full marks? If not, then I have obviously not doing something right.

Doing that should get you full marks or close to it. You should reference legislation at least once if you want full marks.

Also, when referring to past cases, do they have to be all Australian? Can they be from America?

They can be American but they should be Australian. When writing an essay/extended response its ok to use them once or twice, but you should make sure that if you use US cases, you also have some Australian cases in your response as well. If you want to use some foreign cases, you should focus on countries like the UK, Canada and NZ as we have very similar legal systems. However, as I said before, you need to have Australian cases as well

 

[Phoebe 123]

I need help with this question "Explain the importance of post-sentencing decisions in the criminal justice system."

I know the post-sentencing decisions but I don't know the importance of them?? Can you give me some ideas?