-
Finished your HSC? Check out our University Discussion, Non-School forums or help out next year's HSC students! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
"To what EXTENT?" (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Vnoss
- Start date
Hey,
Not really sure how much detail you want but personally, because the question is "to what extent?" I would immediately answer (1st sentence) with my judgement of the question "to a large extent/to a limited extent" e.g. The criminal investigation process achieves justice to a varying extent. This forms your thesis. to what extent = how much? how good is the law?
I would then proceed to quickly address the content I would discuss. For this question I would do to a varying extent or mixed extent, etc. This is because for crime, the system isn't perfect (nothing really is) and so there are good sides and bad sides which you should discuss to demonstrate the depth of your knowledge.
E.g.
I would discuss police powers here because it has good and bad sides and it is a pretty big component of the crim invest process.
Positive - helps protect the community
Negative - police powers can intrude into people's rights (allowing you to discuss cases such as the Haneef case later on)
I would then talk about what areas of the c.i.p are generally effective and contrast it with a however...(these sections of the syllabus) are ineffective.
E.g.
Police powers and warrants are areas where the criminal investigation process achieves justice. However, the ineffectiveness of the law can be seen in the current state of bail and remand. Thus, the c.i.p achieves justice to a mixed/varying/(synonym) extent. I'm not sure here - I know its short but I prefer to keep intro short and leave more for the body)
Make sure to use the words of the question in the introduction somewhere (I prefer first and last) as it helps create a coherent argument.
Are you a 2015er? Hope this helps. (Also hope someone agrees with me so I don't look dumb, LOL)
Not really sure how much detail you want but personally, because the question is "to what extent?" I would immediately answer (1st sentence) with my judgement of the question "to a large extent/to a limited extent" e.g. The criminal investigation process achieves justice to a varying extent. This forms your thesis. to what extent = how much? how good is the law?
I would then proceed to quickly address the content I would discuss. For this question I would do to a varying extent or mixed extent, etc. This is because for crime, the system isn't perfect (nothing really is) and so there are good sides and bad sides which you should discuss to demonstrate the depth of your knowledge.
E.g.
I would discuss police powers here because it has good and bad sides and it is a pretty big component of the crim invest process.
Positive - helps protect the community
Negative - police powers can intrude into people's rights (allowing you to discuss cases such as the Haneef case later on)
I would then talk about what areas of the c.i.p are generally effective and contrast it with a however...(these sections of the syllabus) are ineffective.
E.g.
Police powers and warrants are areas where the criminal investigation process achieves justice. However, the ineffectiveness of the law can be seen in the current state of bail and remand. Thus, the c.i.p achieves justice to a mixed/varying/(synonym) extent. I'm not sure here - I know its short but I prefer to keep intro short and leave more for the body)
Make sure to use the words of the question in the introduction somewhere (I prefer first and last) as it helps create a coherent argument.
Are you a 2015er? Hope this helps. (Also hope someone agrees with me so I don't look dumb, LOL)
Last edited:
Hey MrBleach,
THANK YOU SO MUCH for your response, I understand what you mean...yes I am a 2015er...and u?
Below is my intro for the "to what extent" question (is this good?):
To what extent does the criminal investigation process achieve justice?
The criminal investigation process is to a great extent able to achieve justice. The criminal investigation process involves the discretion of police powers, the interrogation, search and seize of property, through the use of warranty and other legal measures. The criminal investigation process also entails the rights of suspects, such as bail and remand.
**************************************************************************************************
AND Also...I have written an essay for another question, can you please read over it, and mark it out of 15.
Thanks so much, this is really going to help me!
Assess (Make a judgement of value, quality, outcomes, results or size) the effectiveness of the criminal investigation process as a means of achieving justice.
Word Limit: 600 Words
Whilst the criminal investigation process is a moderately effective form of achieving justice, there are certain limitations. The criminal investigation process involves the discretion of police powers, the interrogation, search and seize of property, through the use of warranty and other legal measures. The criminal investigation process also entails the rights of suspects, such as bail and remand.
It can be argued that the criminal investigation process is effective in achieving justice, as it protects the rights of suspects. For example, in the case of Darby v Department of Public Prosecutions (2004), Darby was fully acquitted of the possession of drugs after it was found that the sniffer dog has committed an illegal search, through coming in contact with Darby's genitals. Thus, under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), it was ruled that the evidence was unlawfully obtained and hence, is inadmissible in court. Through the defence of individuals' rights during an investigation it can be deemed that the Criminal Investigation Process is effective in achieving justice for suspects.
In addition, the criminal investigation process is proven to be effective in achieving justice, as it meets societal requirements. For example, through state parliament's enactment of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), police have specific powers that enable them to protect the society. Under this legislation, police have the powers to detain, question, search and seize evidence, and also under the use of reasonable force, make arrests of potential suspects. Similarly, the Bail Amendment Act (2007), is effective in the criminal investigation process, as it limits ones chance/power to grant bail. According to the retired magistrate, Paul Johnson, this ensures greater proof is required for bail applicants and hence, protects and achieves justice for society, by ensuring the presumption against bail is certain. Ultimately, this again renders the criminal investigation process as an effective mean of achieving justice.
In spite of the effectiveness of the criminal investigation process in achieving justice there are, however, limitations to the balancing of rights for suspects and meeting societal needs. For instance, in the newspaper article, "Trish's Law" (DT, 2003), the offender, "gunned down Ms van Koeverden" after he was granted bail by the Supreme Court. Following this wrongful admission of bail, however, Premier Bob Carr, committed the Government to bail law changes to be introduced. Hence, proving that the criminal investigation process of bail has limitations and is somewhat effective in achieving justice.
Overall, the criminal investigation process is somewhat effective in achieving justice. In regards to protecting the rights of suspects, in order to be effective in the future, as written in Trish's Law (DT, 2003), there has to be "exceptional circumstances, the offender has to satisfy the court that there is compelling reasons for being released on bail". Hence, through law reform the criminal investigation process can become much more effective.
THANK YOU SO MUCH for your response, I understand what you mean...yes I am a 2015er...and u?
Below is my intro for the "to what extent" question (is this good?):
To what extent does the criminal investigation process achieve justice?
The criminal investigation process is to a great extent able to achieve justice. The criminal investigation process involves the discretion of police powers, the interrogation, search and seize of property, through the use of warranty and other legal measures. The criminal investigation process also entails the rights of suspects, such as bail and remand.
**************************************************************************************************
AND Also...I have written an essay for another question, can you please read over it, and mark it out of 15.
Thanks so much, this is really going to help me!
Assess (Make a judgement of value, quality, outcomes, results or size) the effectiveness of the criminal investigation process as a means of achieving justice.
Word Limit: 600 Words
Whilst the criminal investigation process is a moderately effective form of achieving justice, there are certain limitations. The criminal investigation process involves the discretion of police powers, the interrogation, search and seize of property, through the use of warranty and other legal measures. The criminal investigation process also entails the rights of suspects, such as bail and remand.
It can be argued that the criminal investigation process is effective in achieving justice, as it protects the rights of suspects. For example, in the case of Darby v Department of Public Prosecutions (2004), Darby was fully acquitted of the possession of drugs after it was found that the sniffer dog has committed an illegal search, through coming in contact with Darby's genitals. Thus, under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), it was ruled that the evidence was unlawfully obtained and hence, is inadmissible in court. Through the defence of individuals' rights during an investigation it can be deemed that the Criminal Investigation Process is effective in achieving justice for suspects.
In addition, the criminal investigation process is proven to be effective in achieving justice, as it meets societal requirements. For example, through state parliament's enactment of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), police have specific powers that enable them to protect the society. Under this legislation, police have the powers to detain, question, search and seize evidence, and also under the use of reasonable force, make arrests of potential suspects. Similarly, the Bail Amendment Act (2007), is effective in the criminal investigation process, as it limits ones chance/power to grant bail. According to the retired magistrate, Paul Johnson, this ensures greater proof is required for bail applicants and hence, protects and achieves justice for society, by ensuring the presumption against bail is certain. Ultimately, this again renders the criminal investigation process as an effective mean of achieving justice.
In spite of the effectiveness of the criminal investigation process in achieving justice there are, however, limitations to the balancing of rights for suspects and meeting societal needs. For instance, in the newspaper article, "Trish's Law" (DT, 2003), the offender, "gunned down Ms van Koeverden" after he was granted bail by the Supreme Court. Following this wrongful admission of bail, however, Premier Bob Carr, committed the Government to bail law changes to be introduced. Hence, proving that the criminal investigation process of bail has limitations and is somewhat effective in achieving justice.
Overall, the criminal investigation process is somewhat effective in achieving justice. In regards to protecting the rights of suspects, in order to be effective in the future, as written in Trish's Law (DT, 2003), there has to be "exceptional circumstances, the offender has to satisfy the court that there is compelling reasons for being released on bail". Hence, through law reform the criminal investigation process can become much more effective.
The criminal investigation process is to a great extent able to achieve justice. The criminal investigation process involves the discretion of police powers, the interrogation, search and seize of property, through the use of warranty and other legal measures. The criminal investigation process also entails the rights of suspects, such as bail and remand.
For the above:
-first sentence is good, words of the Q used, creating a link to the question and great extent answers the Question and establishes a thesis.
However, the rest is a bit weak imo. It's more description than analysis. Link the content quickly to how it supports your thesis. I.e. Instead of "crim invest process involves x"
I would do: "this can be seen in the effectiveness of police powers in balancing the rights of the individual with the community" (can be ineffectiveness depending on thesis) .
For the essay:
I don't really know how to mark out of 15, can only really give my opinion on what to change - ask your teacher? (is this an assessment or something?)
-introduction has a few syntax errors - "the interrogation", also you have mentioned discretion, search and seizure of property, warrants as well as interrogation but I hardly see it in the essay
-a bit more LCMR would be good imo
-less description of cases, more analysis
You described the Darby case however this can be changed to "In Darby v DPP (2004), Darby was acquitted after evidence was found to have been obtained illegally, thereby protecting the rights of the individual. This is because, under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), evidence obtained illegally is inadmissible."
- you have explained what LEPRA does, move on to link it to the question some more - ..these powers allow the police to protect the community from harm
-is the bail amendment act really that effective? by limiting the power to grant bail, it limits judicial discretion (which allows judges to take into account circumstances of the case) and infringes upon the presumption of innocence
-I would discuss both sides a bit more, particularly ineffectiveness, the general consensus is that the system is generally ineffective, bail laws in particular are a huge problem
*countless amendments, complex legislation
*huge number of people in remand in nsw - costs community $$$
-should do one syllabus dot point per paragraph because you have mixed up LEPRA (police powers) and bail in the same paragraph, making the argument less coherent.
-I don't really like the last body paragraph, mostly it is description, I would cut it and instead use the extra words to discuss in greater depth throughout the essay, i'm sure you can find an article dealing with the need for bail law reform due to the above issues and include it when discussing bail laws
- when dealing with LEPRA for example, note the impact these police powers have on the community
conclusion should sum up, what is effective and why?, what is not effective and why? (what I would do) - how can it be improved?
I am a 2014er. HSC exam next week.
I don't think I'll have time to be of that much help but good luck!
For the above:
-first sentence is good, words of the Q used, creating a link to the question and great extent answers the Question and establishes a thesis.
However, the rest is a bit weak imo. It's more description than analysis. Link the content quickly to how it supports your thesis. I.e. Instead of "crim invest process involves x"
I would do: "this can be seen in the effectiveness of police powers in balancing the rights of the individual with the community" (can be ineffectiveness depending on thesis) .
For the essay:
I don't really know how to mark out of 15, can only really give my opinion on what to change - ask your teacher? (is this an assessment or something?)
-introduction has a few syntax errors - "the interrogation", also you have mentioned discretion, search and seizure of property, warrants as well as interrogation but I hardly see it in the essay
-a bit more LCMR would be good imo
-less description of cases, more analysis
You described the Darby case however this can be changed to "In Darby v DPP (2004), Darby was acquitted after evidence was found to have been obtained illegally, thereby protecting the rights of the individual. This is because, under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), evidence obtained illegally is inadmissible."
- you have explained what LEPRA does, move on to link it to the question some more - ..these powers allow the police to protect the community from harm
-is the bail amendment act really that effective? by limiting the power to grant bail, it limits judicial discretion (which allows judges to take into account circumstances of the case) and infringes upon the presumption of innocence
-I would discuss both sides a bit more, particularly ineffectiveness, the general consensus is that the system is generally ineffective, bail laws in particular are a huge problem
*countless amendments, complex legislation
*huge number of people in remand in nsw - costs community $$$
-should do one syllabus dot point per paragraph because you have mixed up LEPRA (police powers) and bail in the same paragraph, making the argument less coherent.
-I don't really like the last body paragraph, mostly it is description, I would cut it and instead use the extra words to discuss in greater depth throughout the essay, i'm sure you can find an article dealing with the need for bail law reform due to the above issues and include it when discussing bail laws
- when dealing with LEPRA for example, note the impact these police powers have on the community
conclusion should sum up, what is effective and why?, what is not effective and why? (what I would do) - how can it be improved?
I am a 2014er. HSC exam next week.
I don't think I'll have time to be of that much help but good luck!