Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 04:47:21 pm

Author Topic: Free Legal Essay Marking!  (Read 141535 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kiiaaa

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #195 on: March 25, 2017, 06:30:37 pm »
Hi
could you please mark my essay for the question: Examine the role of discretion in achieving justice for victims, offenders and society within the criminal justice system.

would you also be able to give me pointers for i should do in the exam and other essays please too (essay writing isnt my strongest)

Discretion plays a pivotal role within the criminal justice system as a means of achieving justice for its stakeholders. With the aid of discretion, decision makers ranging from the police to judges have the ability to interpret how the law is applied to further assist in achieving justice by ensuring it is applied in the correct most way in relation to the presented circumstances. Discretion allows the circumstances under which the crime was conducted to be considered which achieves justice for the offender. Discretion achieves justice to victims by allowing judges to consider Victim Impact statements as well as the impact of the crime upon them and to society by allowing police to make judgments on the situation and thus act accordingly in order to protect society.

Discretion assists offenders in achieving justice as it considered the circumstances of the offence, rather basing sentencing and punishments decisions on judicial guidelines and precedent but rather on a case-by-case basis allowing individual circumstances to be considered by the judicial officer. This is a crucial element of the justice system as no two cases are the same thus shouldn’t be treated the same as well but allow room for the judge to take other factors which could be mitigating or aggravating for the offender, as R v Silva, where the environment and situation under which she stabbed her husband where considered by the judge in determining her sentence.  The use of judicial discretion played a significant role in achieving justice for the offender as despite using a weapon and having no imminent threat to her life when committing the offence, the evidence that she suffered as a ‘battered wife’ (ABC). Thus, discretion helps offenders in achieving justices as it allows room for the judicial officer to apply and interpret the circumstances surrounding the offence.

Judges can determine if victim’s voice and impact of the offence should be considered in sentencing an offender, achieving justice as the victim is given a sense of involvement and well as allowing them to state the impact the crime. It is up to the judge to determine whether the Victim Impact statement is appropriate enough to be considered under s26 of Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. This can further be utilized by the judge in determining the sentence for the offender based on the severity of the impact the crime has had on the victims. This upholds justice as it provides a level of compensation in addition to receiving a voice to lawfully say their opinion in relevant circumstance. Its weakness however lies in that despite in being implemented primarily for sexual assault or murder charges it otherwise can only be considered if the court deems it to be appropriate enough thus can disregard to other offences which could be minor in relation to murder and assault. Hence, judicial discretion can significantly assist a victim feel that justice has been achieved by allowing their voice to be hear in the court in addition to allowing the impact of the offence be considered in sentencing an offender achieving a sense of retribution.

Discretion utilized by police can have a substantial impact on society as it used in moment when determining what will be in the best interest of society. This is a tool that must be used by police on an everyday and impulse basis due to the severity of issues they face. The NSW Police Force has special legal powers under the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) that allow them to carry out their duties in accordance with achieving justice and thus it is up to the police’s discretion in how to exercise their powers under LEPRA appropriately. The primary issue surrounding discretion is balancing the extend of powers of police and the rights of citizens to ensure that police can exercise their powers in what they deem to be suitable to the situation to ensure the protection of society. During the Castle Hill shooting in 2011 the police shot and killed a man who was speculated to be concealing a weapon, which although turned to be false, it can be interpreted that the police took the necessary action to ensure that community was safe. Thus police utilized their discretion in terms of the necessary action to be taken in the moment to what they believe will be in the best interest of society for achieving justice.

Hence, in order to achieve justice for the offenders, victims and society judges and police must utilize their discretion when making decisions in certain situations during various sates of the criminal justice system.

thank you very much :)


CaitlinSavins

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #196 on: March 26, 2017, 09:45:39 pm »
Have I got enough posts to get critique on an essay? My Legal teacher has been busy marking our Business Studies practice exams, and hasn't had time to give me feedback on my human rights essay :(

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #197 on: March 26, 2017, 09:53:42 pm »
Have I got enough posts to get critique on an essay? My Legal teacher has been busy marking our Business Studies practice exams, and hasn't had time to give me feedback on my human rights essay :(

Not yet, you need to hit 30!! I won't be able to mark it tonight anyways, I'd get to it tomorrow - Assuming that isn't too late for you, spend 10 minutes making a few posts tonight then post your essay here as your 30th post!

Perhaps you could lend some opinions to the last few questions in the English Q+A? Elyse is out of action right now, if you could lend some people a hand I bet she'd really appreciate it! ;D

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #198 on: March 27, 2017, 01:52:19 pm »
Hi
could you please mark my essay for the question: Examine the role of discretion in achieving justice for victims, offenders and society within the criminal justice system.

Sure thing kiiaaa! Here is your feedback in the spoiler:

Essay with Feedback
Examine the role of discretion in achieving justice for victims, offenders and society within the criminal justice system.

Discretion plays a pivotal role within the criminal justice system as a means of achieving justice for its stakeholders. Stakeholders probably isn't the best word choice here, I'd say "victims, offenders and society" or something to link to another theme, more sophisticated. With the aid of discretion, decision makers ranging from the police to judges have the ability to interpret how the law is applied to further assist in achieving justice by ensuring it is applied in the correct most way in relation to the presented circumstances. Excellent. Discretion allows the circumstances under which the crime was conducted to be considered which achieves justice for the offender. Discretion achieves justice to victims by allowing judges to consider Victim Impact statements as well as the impact of the crime upon them and to society by allowing police to make judgments on the situation and thus act accordingly in order to protect society. I think this introduction is excellent! It doesn't set up a strong judgement is my only comment, but in an "Examine" essay I wouldn't view that to be strictly necessary - You are emphasising importance which is the big thing.

Discretion assists offenders in achieving justice as it considered the circumstances of the offence, rather basing sentencing and punishments decisions on judicial guidelines and precedent but rather on a case-by-case basis allowing individual circumstances to be considered by the judicial officer. Little bit of a mouthful that sentence, but good intro! This is a crucial element of the justice system as no two cases are the same thus shouldn’t be treated the same as well but allow room for the judge to take other factors which could be mitigating or aggravating for the offender, as R v Silva, where the environment and situation under which she stabbed her husband where considered by the judge in determining her sentence. Again, sentence a little too long. Don't be afraid to use shorter sentences for clarity. Also be sure to reference cases correctly. The use of judicial discretion played a significant role in achieving justice for the offender as despite using a weapon and having no imminent threat to her life when committing the offence, the evidence that she suffered as a ‘battered wife’ (ABC). Thus, discretion helps offenders in achieving justices as it allows room for the judicial officer to apply and interpret the circumstances surrounding the offence. An entire paragraph based around only a single piece of evidence isn't quite enough to be cracking those high ranges, you need multiple per paragraph to make your argument strong.

Judges can determine if victim’s voice and impact of the offence should be considered in sentencing an offender, achieving justice as the victim is given a sense of involvement and well as allowing them to state the impact the crime. It is up to the judge to determine whether the Victim Impact statement is appropriate enough to be considered under s26 of Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. Nice legislative reference. This can further be utilized by the judge in determining the sentence for the offender based on the severity of the impact the crime has had on the victims. This upholds justice as it provides a level of compensation in addition to receiving a voice to lawfully say their opinion in relevant circumstance. Its weakness however lies in that despite in being implemented primarily for sexual assault or murder charges it otherwise can only be considered if the court deems it to be appropriate enough thus can disregard to other offences which could be minor in relation to murder and assault. Remember clarity - Break up your sentences with commas, use shorter sentences where required. Hence, judicial discretion can significantly assist a victim feel that justice has been achieved by allowing their voice to be hear in the court in addition to allowing the impact of the offence be considered in sentencing an offender achieving a sense of retribution. Nice examination of positives and negatives, but, still looking for more than one LCTMR per paragraph for maximum sophistication.

Discretion utilized by police can have a substantial impact on society as it used in moment when determining what will be in the best interest of society. This is a tool that must be used by police on an everyday and impulse basis due to the severity of issues they face. The NSW Police Force has special legal powers under the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) that allow them to carry out their duties in accordance with achieving justice and thus it is up to the police’s discretion in how to exercise their powers under LEPRA appropriately. Those introductory sentences there could probably be condensed to two - Keep things simple to give you more room for cases and laws. The primary issue surrounding discretion is balancing the extend of powers of police and the rights of citizens to ensure that police can exercise their powers in what they deem to be suitable to the situation to ensure the protection of society. This would have been good for near the front of the paragraph! A great issue to consider. During the Castle Hill shooting in 2011 the police shot and killed a man who was speculated to be concealing a weapon, which although turned to be false, it can be interpreted that the police took the necessary action to ensure that community was safe. You should reference a media article here for maximum credibility. Thus police utilized their discretion in terms of the necessary action to be taken in the moment to what they believe will be in the best interest of society for achieving justice.

Hence, in order to achieve justice for the offenders, victims and society judges and police must utilize their discretion when making decisions in certain situations during various sates of the criminal justice system. Try to make a beefier conclusion. Restate your arguments, reconsider the issue you are discussing. Give a nice thorough summation, 3-4 sentences if you can.

This is a good essay kiiaaa! You have a well structured argument and respond to the question well. I would suggest for you to include more cases, laws, media articles - More evidence to give your argument sophistication. You need multiple per paragraph - You can look for media articles complementing your issues, look for reports with statistics, that sort of thing. Also be sure to make your ideas clear by breaking your ideas up appropriately - Short sentences and long sentences with commas ;D great work!

PS - This could be helpful!

sage_slayer

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • :')
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #199 on: April 01, 2017, 07:21:05 pm »
hi there,
basically all i really need to know is if my information is accurate. im doing the FLA 1995 :) thanks.
…can be found in the Family Law Reform, Act 1995 (Cth) which was introduced in response to Australia’s ratification of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CROC). Features of this Act includes the use of the phrase “Best interest of the child” which is likewise explicitly used in CROC, the introduction of parenting plans and replacing the phrases “custody” and “access” to “residential orders” and “contact orders.” When making decisions, judges were and are required to consider the added phrase as the basis of their decision which is a positive step towards protecting children. However the changes in phrases, intended to remove the notion of ‘ownership’ over a child and ‘winning’ the child in a dispute between the parents were not as effective as attitudes were not changed and the renewed phrases are not generally used in media articles therefore it is virtually useless. Parenting plans however are useful as it offers a written agreement which sets out parenting arrangements for children. Though it is not legally binding, it is still a good resource for parents as it encourages cooperation between parents. This Law reform successfully reflected the ratification of CROC and thus society’s expectations were met.
:')

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #200 on: April 02, 2017, 12:58:34 am »
hi there,
basically all i really need to know is if my information is accurate. im doing the FLA 1995 :) thanks.
…can be found in the Family Law Reform, Act 1995 (Cth) which was introduced in response to Australia’s ratification of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CROC). Features of this Act includes the use of the phrase “Best interest of the child” which is likewise explicitly used in CROC, the introduction of parenting plans and replacing the phrases “custody” and “access” to “residential orders” and “contact orders.” When making decisions, judges were and are required to consider the added phrase as the basis of their decision which is a positive step towards protecting children. However the changes in phrases, intended to remove the notion of ‘ownership’ over a child and ‘winning’ the child in a dispute between the parents were not as effective as attitudes were not changed and the renewed phrases are not generally used in media articles therefore it is virtually useless. Parenting plans however are useful as it offers a written agreement which sets out parenting arrangements for children. Though it is not legally binding, it is still a good resource for parents as it encourages cooperation between parents. This Law reform successfully reflected the ratification of CROC and thus society’s expectations were met.

Welcome to the forums Sage! ;D your paragraph definitely contains accurate information, nice! As a general piece of feedback for the paragraph (not sure whether it is for an essay or whatever), but if this was for a HSC style essay, try to cut back on the description of what the act contains and introduce more arguments and analysis of evidence. So instead of going through that list of changes, you could say, "The FLR Act of 1995 implemented several changes in response to Australia's ratification of CROC that have proved effective in the care and protection of children. Such can be seen in the case of ___________." Or, "Media articles such as ____________ show there is more to do." More evidence, more punchy, to make your writing more powerful ;D

Kekemato_BAP

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Keep calm and study more
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #201 on: April 04, 2017, 07:16:50 pm »
Hi!! This is a section of my legal essay and really appreciate it if someone can give feedback on it.
Criminal law's main focus should be on what is beneficial for the whole community. To what extent does the criminal justice system meet the needs of the community. Use the statement in your response as well as relevant examples.

Balancing the rights of the community and the offender is vital in achieving justice. The focus of the criminal justice system should be based on the benefits to the whole community through protecting the rights of th community to safety, and the role of law reform in meeting their moral and ethical standards. However, the needs of the community are not satisfied in certain areas of the law such as granting of bail, law reform, and the purpose of sentencing in achieving justice for the victims and the community. As a result, this hinders the criminal justice system's effectiveness in meeting the considerations of the greater community when dealing with offenders.
The community and victims have the right to safety from the offender, and balancing the rights of these rights with those of the offenders and their families is vital in meeting the needs of the community. The offender has its own family which is also a part of the community, therefore the individual rights of the offender must also be protected in the criminal justice system in order to satisfy and benefit the community's need for justice. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2012, about 25% of Australian prisoners were not convicted but held in remand. This is clear evidence of the ineffectiveness of the Australian criminal justice system in respecting the needs and rights of the offender and their families whom are also a member and aspect of the community. The key issue is the balancing of the individual rights of the offender and the community's need for safety from the offender, especially if they are convicted of violent crimes, thus bail and remand are greatly concerned with the community's need for safetyand peace of mind. However, the "innocent until proven guilty presumption is a human right under Article 11 of the UDHR which remand ignores to protect the community and meet the needs of the community in maintaining safety from violent offenders. There have been numerous instances of the community being put at risk by the use of bail such as the Sydney Siege 2014 where Monis was actually out on bail for sexual offences. This clearly highlights the Australian legal system's ineffectiveness of addressing the safety needs of the community under the current bail system of the Bail Amendment Act 2014 (NSW) which interfere with the offender and their families, but also proves a great risk for the community if bail was granted.
Hello

elysepopplewell

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3236
  • "Hey little fighter, soon it will be brighter."
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #202 on: April 04, 2017, 09:58:12 pm »
Hi!! This is a section of my legal essay and really appreciate it if someone can give feedback on it.
Criminal law's main focus should be on what is beneficial for the whole community. To what extent does the criminal justice system meet the needs of the community. Use the statement in your response as well as relevant examples.

Hey! Let me first say - this is a tricky question. It's quite broad in that you can pick and choose from any part of the syllabus, but it also makes me wonder who the "community" is? Is someone no longer part of the community once they've committed a crime or are they still to be included in the beneficiaries of the system? Interesting... I've put my comments in the spoiler below :)

Spoiler
Balancing the rights of the community and the offender is vital in achieving justice. Aha! You've already answered my question. Good job. The focus of the criminal justice system should be based on the benefits to the whole community through protecting the rights of the community to safety, and the role of law reform in meeting their moral and ethical standards. Worrrrrk those themes and challenges! However, the needs of the community are not satisfied in certain areas of the law such as granting of bail, law reform, and the purpose of sentencing in achieving justice for the victims and the community. As a result, this hinders the criminal justice system's effectiveness in meeting the considerations of the greater community when dealing with offenders. Absolutely beautiful analysis. This is succinct, original, and explains exactly what I am yet to anticipate in the essay.
The community and victims have the right to safety from the offender, and balancing the rights of these rights ??? with those of the offenders and their families is vital in meeting the needs of the community. The offender has its own family which is also a part of the community, therefore the individual rights of the offender must also be protected in the criminal justice system in order to satisfy and benefit the community's need for justice. This is why I think this question is odd: it forces you to decide who is community and who is not. You're doing well at working with it. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2012, about 25% of Australian prisoners were not convicted but held in remand. This is clear evidence of the ineffectiveness of the Australian criminal justice system in respecting the needs and rights of the offender and their families whom are also a member and aspect of the community. I'd bring in human rights here - what does this contravene? Innocent until proven guilty? 25% is a large number of people to have locked up without being proven guilty. The key issue is the balancing of the individual rights of the offender and the community's need for safety from the offender, especially if they are convicted of violent crimes, thus bail and remand are greatly concerned with the community's need for safetyand peace of mind. However, the "innocent until proven guilty presumption is a human right under Article 11 of the UDHR which remand ignores to protect the community and meet the needs of the community in maintaining safety from violent offenders. Oh, I take that back, here it is! There have been numerous instances of the community being put at risk by the use of bail such as the Sydney Siege 2014 where Monis was actually out on bail for sexual offences. This clearly highlights the Australian legal system's ineffectiveness of addressing the safety needs of the community under the current bail system of the Bail Amendment Act 2014 (NSW) which interfere with the offender and their families, but also proves a great risk for the community if bail was granted.

Ok, wow! This was outstanding. You've backed everything up with stats and legislation which is absolutely fabulous. This is an exemplary paragraph and you should be very proud. My only suggestion is super tiny. I think the last sentence needs some adjusting, or a new sentence needs to be added. Just for the purpose of clarity. So from the last sentence I can see that the safety of the community is threatened, but I want to have a clear summary of your perspective on how this conflicts with the accused. For example,
"The criminal legal system's treatment of bail and remand only meets the needs of the community in some cases, and in doing so, inhibits the right to liberty of the accused." Just to leave your marker knowing exactly what you mean, there is no question, and a band 6 for you! ;)

Also, one other tiny thing actually: be aware of talking about the accused and the offender simultaneously. When you're talking about pre-sentencing, it is the accused as they are not yet proven guilty. If they have been proven guilty, they are the offender :) It's no biggie, but when you're specifically talking about remand or bail, the "accused" is the most correct term :)
Not sure how to navigate around ATAR Notes? Check out this video!

Kekemato_BAP

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • Keep calm and study more
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #203 on: April 05, 2017, 10:38:18 pm »
Thank you so much!! This was actually from my half yearly a few weeks ago and I got 13/15 for it. There's like 3 more pages but I wasn't bothered to type it up  :P
I really appreciate the feedback and will make improvements!
Hello

elysepopplewell

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3236
  • "Hey little fighter, soon it will be brighter."
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #204 on: April 05, 2017, 11:52:41 pm »
Thank you so much!! This was actually from my half yearly a few weeks ago and I got 13/15 for it. There's like 3 more pages but I wasn't bothered to type it up  :P
I really appreciate the feedback and will make improvements!

So happy for you! What a great mark. It's only up from here!
Not sure how to navigate around ATAR Notes? Check out this video!

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #205 on: April 27, 2017, 12:03:25 am »
Hi,

Could someone please have a look at my essay. I think it might be abit too long to write in 45 mins so if u could point stuff out thats like unncessary :D Also my other possible question is To what extent has family law responded to changing values in the community? Would talking about parental responsibility, surrogacy and same sex be right. SORRY FOR ASKING SO MUCH STUFF AS WELL.

Hey davidss! Thanks for posting!! I've attached your essay below with comments in bold:

Essay with Feedback
The law has been partially effective in achieving equality, fairness and access – which form the notion of justice – for married and de facto couples and their children during relationship breakdowns through an examination of the law’s capacity to protect individual’s rights. A little unclear in that sentence - I think it flows better to say it like, "To be truly effective in achieving protecting individual rights, the law needs to provide just outcomes. The legal system has been partially effective in achieving equality, fairness and access to this end, blah blah blah." Splitting in two gives it more clarity. It provides guidance to parties during the lead up to and actuality of a breakdown. Not super relevant/beneficial to the intro. The law also ensures a provision of comprehensive arrangements for children, and provides means of the allocation of property following relationship breakdowns. Don't describe the measures, analyse them! Do they work and why? However, the range of avenues that is facilitated by the law, coupled with continuous reforms to statute law, and to a lesser extent common law induces greater complexity and inconsistency that impedes the achievement of justice. This last sentence is great! Looking for a more definite conclusion: "Thus, it can be said that _________."

Divorce orders and non-court based services have been partly effective in achieving justice by providing guidance to parties in relationship breakdowns. Excellent intro. According to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), no party is legally bound to a relationship and due to the no-fault divorce principle espoused, it has enabled “the empty legal shell to be destroyed with the maximum fairness” as university academic Brohier writes in the 2015 Austlii journal. Nice use of LCTMI in a really fluent way there, normally I'd say to avoid description of the law, but I think this works well. As per s48, a divorce order is approved by the court once the applicants provide evidence that “The marriage has broken down irretrievably.” This entails 12 months of separation, which was breached in Campbell v Case (2012) due to a continued sexual relationship. Be careful, you aren't evaluating here! What worked? What didn't? Effective or ineffective and why? On the other hand, since de facto couples are not recognised as a legal marriage under S4AA, they are not legally required to go through the arduous process of a breakdown. Evidently, there is inequality and unfairness as a married couple essentially emulates a de facto but has to endure longer emotional trauma. Nice! Accessibility has been improved for parties experiencing financial hardship through reductions from $865 to $265 for the filing fee of a divorce order. Source for this? Just an interesting stat, it would have more weight if it had a reputable source. However, the 2009 Attorney-General’s Department report ‘A Strategic Framework for Access to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice System’ reported that 2% of waivered fees represented legal aid exemptions. The unfair and inadequate protection of vulnerable litigants’ rights have been emphasised by the Australian article: ‘Divorce fee too high for poor,’ reporting that Women’s Legal Services found that the $265 fee comprised “over 80 per cent of the weekly single parent payment.” Again, love the variety of evidence! This lack of fairness and failure in protecting rights is also apparent where children of de facto couples are neglected in that s55A stipulates proper arrangements must be made for the welfare of children only from married couples, before divorce orders are granted. Non-court based services are facilitated via family counselling in S10B and family dispute resolution, evinced in S10F. While the sections are impressive, describing the purpose of each isn't going to earn you points! Relationships Australia for instance provides family counselling services, and with family dispute resolution, they provide parties with emotional support. These services are accessible to parties during any stage of the breakdown, and are fair as each hearing considers party’s different circumstances and promotes cooperation between parties which improves future relationships with children. Ultimately, the complexity and inconsistency of the legal framework has undermined individual’s rights and has thus partially achieved justice in breakdowns.Really solid paragraph - Evidence is phenomenal. Watch that you are always evaluating, not just describing, the legal frameworks.

The law has been partly effective in achieving justice for de facto and married couples in terms of allocating property after relationship breakdowns. One avenue that the law facilitates are financial agreements, established under s90B-S90BD for married couples, and following the Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008, s90UB-S90UD for de facto couples. Its high accessibility is continued as agreements can be formed at any time and are legally binding without courts. Nice, you introduce the mechanism then immediately evaluate. Consequently, the law has placed stringent criteria to protect parties’ rights. For instance, s90G outlines that two lawyers are required as advisers. This brings forth issues of equality and fairness in that those with less financial power are prone to loopholes in agreements. Further complexities pertinent to financial agreements have led to them being set aside, as in Black v Black (2008). This prompted the Federal Justice System Amendment Act (2009), allowing courts to apply discretion in upholding agreements even when technicalities are not adhered to. Was this an effective or an ineffective change? Evaluate EVERY piece of evidence you present. The ABC article (16/5/16) also suggests that a “lack of government funding” in Legal Aid for family matters is “destroying lives,” thus inhibiting access to justice. This is reinforced by a report from the University of Adelaide, detailing that woman receive 9%, compared to the 61% ex-partners receive of marital assets, yet when legal aid was used, there was an estimated average of a 55/45% split. Thus demonstrating, what? How does this relate? Be careful not to go onto "content vomits," where although you have amazing knowledge, you aren't using everything in the most effective way! Courts also have the power of arbitration to resolve disputes in property allocation, accessible for both de facto couples under s90F, s90M and S75, s79 for married couples. Specifically, s79 pursues fairness, where “the court may make such order” of the alteration of property interests. However, due to the no-fault divorce principle, emotional strain has been unfairly dismissed as a factor in determining property allocation. This is in light of research by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, with 24% of men and 12% of women feeling isolated after 2 years of divorce. Greater need to protect individual’s rights has seen domestic violence and other misconduct be factored into property allocation, evident in Kennon v Kennon (1997). However, this has led to contradictions in other cases, such as Palmer & Palmer (2010), which dismissed the principles in the Kennon case as obiter dicta. Although reform has been made to improve the protection of rights, inadequate consideration of parties for parties in statute law, in addition to the inconsistencies arising in common law have culminated in a partial effectiveness of achieving justice in breakdowns. Another AMAZING paragraph for evidence, and a little better analytically, but still work to do there. I want you to take more time to evaluate each piece of evidence/group of evidence, explain how it relates to your argument. Basically, you are throwing a few dozen $2 cheeseburgers from Maccas at me. I want half a dozen Big Macs!

The law’s facilitation of comprehensive child arrangements have been moderately effective during relationship breakdowns. In line with Australia’s international and natural law obligation to forefront children’s rights during breakdowns, article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) stating “the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration” have been embedded into s60B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). Nice - It is really easy to forget treaties in the Family option. Excellent work for including them. One arrangement adopting this notion are parenting plans, established under s63B with access branching to both de facto and married couples. Regarding these plan’s fairness, the National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Council’s has written they are “capable of easy alteration to meet the changing needs of the child” and can identify potentially contentious issues “in as a positive a way as possible.” However, in a 2009 report by the Australian Psychological Society ‘Parenting after separation,’ only 25% of parents have a cooperative relationship, thus limiting the protection of children’s rights. Good. In response, the law has established legally binding parenting orders under s64B, again accessible to all parties, which strives to improve fairness and equality by placing the onus on the courts to determine child arrangements. Good - Nice use of the key terms 'accessible, fairness, equality' etc. Watch for emotive language, "strives" rings an alarm for me. As written in the Australian (6/2/2010), parental responsibility has been another issue in arrangements for children - The AIF reported that before 2006, there was a “presumption in favour of an 80:20 outcome” for mothers, clearly deviating away from an equal and fair protection of children’s rights to both parents. Excellent. Consequently, the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006 was introduced, establishing equal shared responsibility to encourage children to maintain meaningful relationships with parents. This improved fairness in that judicial discretion is used to determine parental responsibility based on greatest caring capacity, but crucially still maintaining a parental relationship for children’s development. At the same time, this exposes children to domestic violent parents, as was the case in Robins v Ruddock (2010), where the two daughters were ordered to spend a small amount of time with their father, a convicted child sex offender, frankly neglecting their protection. THIS is the perfect level of detail. See how you are properly explaining and analysing this argument you are leading us through? This is the perfect balance. A 2013 Family Matters publication recounted that there was likely to be “entrenched conflict” from shared responsibility beyond the relationship breakdown. This prompted the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Act 2011, wherein the “need to protect the child from physical or psychological harm” has greater weight than a meaningful parental relationship, consequently improving fairness for children. Whilst arrangements for children are paramount, MRR v GR (2010) highlights how the law protects parent’s rights where shared responsibility was impractical to uphold equal shared responsibility due to the deteriorating circumstance of a party. Therefore, while there are still issues that must be addressed regarding arrangements for children, the law has reasonably achieved justice for them in relationship breakdowns. This is probably your strongest paragraph - The argument was more fleshed out than the prior two. Nicely done.

Overall, the Family Law Act has primarily established the foundation for providing guidance, comprehensive arrangements for children and allocating property during relationship breakdowns. Issues of inconsistency and complexity are still prevalent for the protection of individual’s rights, and therefore, the law has been partially effective in achieving justice. I'd normally like a beefier conclusion, but I think this does the job reasonably well.

Incredible essay David, truly stellar stuff. Your evidence is just, well, incredible. Probably the best essay in terms of breadth and depth of Legal evidence I've read in a long time. Well done!

What you need to work on is what you do with that evidence. I wrote in a comment, you are giving me a few dozen $2 cheeseburgers in those first two paragraphs. You cram a HEAP of evidence in, and that's great, but you don't do much to link them to your argument. It's either missing or implied. What I want you to do instead is give me just a few Big Macs, some groups of evidence that logically flow together and are linked cleverly to your argument. YOu did this well in your final paragraph!

In terms of things to cut - I know you probably worked so hard to get them, but I don't feel the section numbers are adding a whole lot for you, in most of the cases you use them. Sometimes they work, sometimes they just seem like they are adding clutter to your response. Try it out - It could be smoother to remove some of them and just reference the law itself. Additionally, watch for places (early half primarily) where you are just describing the mechanism. Don't do that - Cut it and jump straight into judging it, providing only the barest of details as to what it actually is :)

Fantastic essay though my friend, easily strong Band 6 material if you tidy up how you use that evidence ;D

(Yep, you can discuss those things for that other question!) :)

elysepopplewell

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3236
  • "Hey little fighter, soon it will be brighter."
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #206 on: April 27, 2017, 04:36:54 am »
What you need to work on is what you do with that evidence. I wrote in a comment, you are giving me a few dozen $2 cheeseburgers in those first two paragraphs. You cram a HEAP of evidence in, and that's great, but you don't do much to link them to your argument. It's either missing or implied. What I want you to do instead is give me just a few Big Macs, some groups of evidence that logically flow together and are linked cleverly to your argument. YOu did this well in your final paragraph!

I will definitely be using this McDonalds analogy in the future. Love it! :)
Not sure how to navigate around ATAR Notes? Check out this video!

anotherworld2b

  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 747
  • School Grad Year: 2017
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #207 on: May 05, 2017, 10:30:29 pm »
I attempted to respond to this question but I'm not how to critically reflect my understanding of it

Spoiler

Discuss the following statement: ‘Since federation, the balance of power has slowly shifted from the states to a dominance of the federal government.’  Investigate this topic and prepare an in-class essay that reflects a CRITICAL understanding of the topic.


Essay: Argue for the statement.


The Founding Fathers intended Australia to be a coordinate or cooperative federal system.  Since Federation in 1901, Australia has become more coercive over time in the regards that power has slowly shifted from the states to federal government. Power comes with the ability to make law. The Constitution divides legislative powers between the Commonwealth and the States into exclusive, concurrent and residual powers. However,the balance of power has undeniably shifted numerous powers from the states to Commonwealth validating its dominance. There are three main reasons that have influenced Australian federation becoming more coercive. These reasons include evolving High Court interpretation, the referral of powers and Vertical Fiscal Imbalance


One reason that influenced the shift of power from the States to Federal government was evolving High Court interpretation. High Court decisions have been the most important mechanism for constitutional change in Australia and has a tremendous influence over the federal balance of power. These decisions are derived from the High Court's interpretation.It is assumed that the High Court’s interpretation should lack bias in their decisions.Australia’s Constitution divides the powers within the Australian federation by making all the powers exclusive, concurrent or residual. Concurrent powers means that the Commonwealth and the States may both pass laws. However, when these laws are conflict the dominance of the Commonwealth over the State is evidently supported by section 109 where state(s) laws are invalid if they conflict with Commonwealth law. The fact that the High Court favours the Commonwealth under section 109 shows a shift in power. Despite the fact, that the High Court’s major role is the hearing of challenges to the constitutionality of Federal and State laws. When the High Court interprets a case in which any of the exclusive or concurrent powers are in dispute the outcome can redefine the power(s) and so change the balance of powers between the levels of government. The shift of power from the States to the Federal government is evident in the Engineers Case in 1920 where Justices Higgins and Isaacs ruled that Commonwealth Government had the authority of the Commonwealth Arbitration Commission to determine conditions of workers in WA Government Railways (concurrent powers, s51). Overall, the judgements of the High Court have shifted the federal balance of favour of the Commonwealth.


The referral of power is another reason that influenced the shift of power from the states to federal government. Referral of powers is when States may voluntarily hand over responsibilities to the Commonwealth Government. Section 51 makes it possible for States to pass powers to the Commonwealth if they choose to do so. This means that the Commonwealth has the power to make laws in regards to those referred matters. As a result of the referral of powers the Commonwealth Government has been strengthened within the federation.The referral of powers to the Commonwealth is an irreversible process. New laws only to the State concerned the State(s) cannot have the power returned.A referral of power affects only the referring state- all the other states retain their power.The referral of power by a State to the Commonwealth changes the balance of Powers within the federation. 2003 - The commonwealth Government enacted the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorism) Act after all States referred powers relating to this act to the Commonwealth Government. Another example is 2001 - states referred powers regarding incorporation processes to the Commonwealth. The resulting Corporations Act (2001) is a result of a combination of referral of corporation's powers by the States to the Commonwealth. As a result of the referral of powers the Commonwealth government has been strengthened within federation.


Other reasons that influenced the shift of power from States to Federal government was Vertical Fiscal Imbalance. The revenue/expenditure imbalance is approximately 30% in favour of the Commonwealth. This situation is referred to as the vertical fiscal imbalance or VFI. The Founding Fathers were aware that the Commonwealth would end up collecting surplus revenues. Section 87 and Section 96 were written into the Constitution to deal with the imbalance of revenue in favour of the Commonwealth. Section 94 required the Commonwealth to distribute its surplus revenues to the States in any manner that the Parliament ‘deemed fair’. However, after 1901 the Commonwealth Parliament taking into the consideration Section 94 deemed it fair to pay all its surplus revenue into trust funds to cover future spending. This eliminated the surplus and left no money to distribute to the States.  The States challenged this in the Surplus Revenue case but the High Court found the Commonwealth’s action was constitutional. Over time from 1901 sections 90, 96 and 87 have developed over time to favour the Commonwealth over the States. Uniform Tax Case 1 (1942) - decrease in state power as they lost an important revenue stream of income tax to the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth now has much greater share of revenue collecting than the states. Changes relating to revenue collection in 1901 and the early years after Federation, the Commonwealth Government did not have responsibility for collection of income taxation as this was a state responsibility. After the High Court decisions in the 1st and 2nd Uniform Tax Cases (1942 and 1957) the responsibility for collection of income taxation became a Commonwealth responsibility which increased their revenue at the cost of the states. The federal government's dominance is evident by the fact that Sections designed to protect State revenues by the Founding fathers are now considered redundant and have developed to favour the Commonwealth.


The balance of power has slowly shifted from the states to a dominance of the federal government since federation. Three main reasons for this include evolving High court interpretation, referral of powers and Vertical Fiscal Imbalance.




kiiaaa

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #208 on: May 07, 2017, 10:16:44 am »
Hello everyone!

I was wondering if you could please mark this essay of mine. i couldnt find that many cases however and im not sure if i have talked enough about its effectivness.
thanks heaps guys!  :) :) :) :) :)

EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SENTENCING AND PUNISHMENT AS A MEANS OF ACHIEVING JUSTICE

Judges must balance the rights of victims, society and the offender when sentencing in court to ensure an adequate punishment is imposed, that isn’t too severe for the offender, retributed for the victim and acts as a general deterrence to society. Victims play a pivotal role in sentencing primarily through victim impact statements which are considered by the judge when determining a punishment. In addition, the judge must consider alternatives methods to sentencing including circle sentencing and restorative justice. The judge must also consider post sentencing considerations during the sentencing process. Thus, justice for the stakeholders are achieved to a certain level having the judge consider various aspects before and after determining a sentence.
The victims can have a significant role within the criminal justice system, from reporting the crime, testifying at trial and submitting a victim Impact statement. The victim impact statement is a voluntary statement written by either the victim or the family about the impact of the crime upon them, providing them an opportunity to let the court know the effect of the crime either physically or psychologically. It falls under the NSW Charter of Victim’s Rights and was introduced as a result of the “disturbing lack of confidence in the justice system’s ability to effectively bring people to justice and meet the need of victims of crime” (Victims must be heard in sentencing” NSW Attorney General John Hatzistergos 2010). Further rights such as respect of the victim’s dignity and protection of identity and from the accused are ensured under the Victim’s Right Act 1996 (NSW). However, the drawbacks of the Victim Impact Statement lie in it being unsworn thus allows room for the victim to fabricate as well as acting as an aggravating factor for the offender which can impact their notion of justice being achieved. Hence victim impact statement only provide justice to a certain degree as it can impact the offender
It is imperative for courts to consider alternatives to sentencing being circle sentencing and restorative justice as means of achieving justice especially for the offender and society. Circle sentencing is a more traditional method of dispute resolution forming part of Aboriginal customary law made up of a magistrate and aboriginal elders aimed at improving the community’s confidence in the justice system as well as reducing recidivism. However, whilst it may be extremely effective for Aboriginal people having strong ties to their culture, BOSCAR evaluated that circle sentencing has failed to reduce the risk of re-offending by indigenous offenders thus displaying the further review is required in the operations of circle sentencing. Restorative justice is a voluntary conference allowing both the victim and offender to interact. While it allows the victims to find a sense of closure having talked to the offender it also proves to be confronting to the offender having seen the impact of their actions thus ask for an apology, show remorse and be responsible for their actions. While it combats the issue of the victim feeling they weren’t playing an active part in the sentencing process the Australian Bureau of Crime statistics and Research showed that youth conferencing on a large scale proved effective having reduced re-offending by 15-20% regardless of factors such as gender, criminal history and Aboriginality of the offender. However, for those over 18 it can be less effective as a criminal pattern may have been established thus difficult to break. Thus, while post sentencing consideration have been effective in achieving justice this it isn’t in majority of the cases as usually recidivism does occur thus not effectively balancing society’s rights hence suggesting further development required. 
It is the court’s role to consider post sentencing considerations in order to help protect the rights of victims and society. Parole being the conditional release of a prisoner from custody after the completion of the minimum sentence encapsulates the ideology of it being an incentive for the offender to rehabilitate as well as make their integration into the community much easier. Preventive detention under the Terrorism (police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) does protect society from being a potential victim as it removes the person’s right to freedom despite having not committed the offence hence not achieving justice for the offender that has their rights stripped from them despite there being no actus reus. Continued detention is another preventative method involving the ongoing detention of the offender once their sentence is complete if the court is satisfied there is a high degree of probability that the offender will reoffend under the Crimes (Serious sex offenders) Act 2006 (NSW). The court aims to ensure the protection of the community at the expense of the offender having to further rehabilitate and compromising their freedom. Although these methods are highly controversial they are effective in their prime aim being to protect the rights of victims and society and thus achieve justice in those terms but does it at the expense of the offender’s rights.
Hence while the criminal justice system is effective in its sentencing and punishment it is only to a certain degree as it does involve the compromise of one stakeholder’s rights in order to balance the other’s.


elysepopplewell

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3236
  • "Hey little fighter, soon it will be brighter."
Re: Free Legal Essay Marking!
« Reply #209 on: May 07, 2017, 06:46:51 pm »
I attempted to respond to this question but I'm not how to critically reflect my understanding of it

Hey anotherworld,

For what it's worth, I know literally nothing about the way powers have shifted since federation, so I'm going to give this my best shot but I won't be able to comment on accuracy or suggest other points for you, I'm sorry! It's just not in the HSC syllabus. If LOVEPHYSICS knows any better you might get an extra hand :) I'll give it a go!

Spoiler
Discuss the following statement: ‘Since federation, the balance of power has slowly shifted from the states to a dominance of the federal government.’  Investigate this topic and prepare an in-class essay that reflects a CRITICAL understanding of the topic.


Essay: Argue for the statement.


The Founding Fathers intended Australia to be a coordinate or cooperative federal system.  Since Federation in 1901, Australia has become more coercive over time in the regards that power has slowly shifted from the states to federal government. Power comes with the ability to make law. The Constitution divides legislative powers between the Commonwealth and the States into exclusive, concurrent and residual powers. However,the balance of power has undeniably shifted numerous powers from the states to Commonwealth validating its dominance. There are three main reasons that have influenced Australian federation becoming more coercive. These reasons include evolving High Court interpretation, the referral of powers and Vertical Fiscal Imbalance. This sounds good to me!


One reason that influenced From a fluency point of view, I don't think this makes perfect sense. "One reason for the shift of power..." does make sense. the shift of power from the States to Federal government was evolving High Court interpretation. High Court decisions have been the most important mechanism for constitutional change in Australia and has a tremendous influence over the federal balance of power. These decisions are derived from the High Court's interpretation. It is assumed or "expected"? that the High Court’s interpretation should lack bias in their decisions.Australia’s Constitution divides the powers within the Australian federation by making all the powers exclusive, concurrent or residual. Concurrent powers means that the Commonwealth and the States may both pass laws. However, when these laws are conflict the dominance of the Commonwealth over the State is evidently supported by section 109 where state(s) laws are invalid if they conflict with Commonwealth law. The fact that the High Court favours the Commonwealth under section 109 shows a shift in power. This could be my ignorance, but did the High Court ever not favour the Commonwealth? In order to show a shift, we need to show a starting point and an ending point. Despite the fact, that the High Court’s major role is the hearing of challenges to the constitutionality of Federal and State laws. When the High Court interprets a case in which any of the exclusive or concurrent powers are in dispute the outcome can redefine the power(s) and so change the balance of powers between the levels of government. The shift of power from the States to the Federal government is evident in the Engineers Case in 1920 where Justices Higgins and Isaacs ruled that Commonwealth Government had the authority of the Commonwealth Arbitration Commission to determine conditions of workers in WA Government Railways (concurrent powers, s51). Overall, the judgements of the High Court have shifted the federal balance of favour of the Commonwealth.


The referral of power is another element of the Australian legal system that influencedreason that influenced the shift of power from the states to federal government. Referral of powers is when States may voluntarily hand over responsibilities to the Commonwealth Government. Section 51 of? makes it possible for States to pass powers to the Commonwealth if they choose to do so. This means that the Commonwealth has the power to make laws in regards to those referred matters. As a result of the referral of powers the Commonwealth Government has been strengthened within the federation. Good argument! The referral of powers to the Commonwealth is an irreversible process. New laws only to the State concerned the State(s) cannot have the power returned.A referral of power affects only the referring state- all the other states retain their power.The referral of power by a State to the Commonwealth changes the balance of Powers within the federation. 2003 - The commonwealth Government enacted the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorism) Act after all States referred powers relating to this act to the Commonwealth Government. Another example is 2001 - states referred powers regarding incorporation processes to the Commonwealth. The resulting Corporations Act (2001) is a result of a combination of referral of corporation's powers by the States to the Commonwealth. As a result of the referral of powers the Commonwealth government has been strengthened within federation. I suggest adjusting the wording a bit here, when I read it I assumed you had written the same sentence twice and it jars instead of proving your point. Perhaps this kind of thing doesn't matter much in WACE, but I'll suggest it anyway! :)


Other reasons that influenced the shift of power from States to Federal government was Vertical Fiscal Imbalance. The revenue/expenditure imbalance is approximately 30% in favour of the Commonwealth. This situation is referred to as the vertical fiscal imbalance or VFI. The Founding Fathers were aware that the Commonwealth would end up collecting surplus revenues. Section 87 and Section 96 were written into the Constitution to deal with the imbalance of revenue in favour of the Commonwealth. Section 94 required the Commonwealth to distribute its surplus revenues to the States in any manner that the Parliament ‘deemed fair’. However, after 1901 the Commonwealth Parliament taking into the consideration Section 94 deemed it fair to pay all its surplus revenue into trust funds to cover future spending. This eliminated the surplus and left no money to distribute to the States.  The States challenged this in the Surplus Revenue case but the High Court found the Commonwealth’s action was constitutional. Over time from 1901 sections 90, 96 and 87 of what document? have developed over time to favour the Commonwealth over the States. Uniform Tax Case 1 (1942) - decrease in state power as they lost an important revenue stream of income tax to the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth now has much greater share of revenue collecting than the states. Changes relating to revenue collection in 1901 and the early years after Federation, the Commonwealth Government did not have responsibility for collection of income taxation as this was a state responsibility. After the High Court decisions in the 1st and 2nd Uniform Tax Cases (1942 and 1957) the responsibility for collection of income taxation became a Commonwealth responsibility which increased their revenue at the cost of the states. The federal government's dominance is evident by the fact that Sections designed to protect State revenues by the Founding fathers are now considered redundant and have developed to favour the Commonwealth. Great examples and a solid argument!


The balance of power has slowly shifted from the states to a dominance of the federal government since federation. Three main reasons for this include evolving High court interpretation, referral of powers and Vertical Fiscal Imbalance.

Looks like a neat and tidy little response to me! Everything you've suggested is supported well, I think you should be pleased with this! You'll have to excuse my ignorance with some parts of this, but hopefully it gives a few small pointers and overall affirms your work :)
Not sure how to navigate around ATAR Notes? Check out this video!