Hi there, I haven't written a conclusion to this yet, but I'm not sure if I am on the right track in what I am writing- or more importantly if I'm even answering the question!
The question is- Evaluate the law’s effectiveness in encouraging cooperation to achieve justice for parties involved in relationship breakdown.
The other thing is there is so much involved in this question that I am not sure what to add in and what to leave out. E.g. I haven't talked about ADVOs but that is a pretty big part of it.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks :)
Hey, I'm not sure where I should add case studies to this !! Also do you think I have covered everything?
Hi, I would love to receive feedback regarding this essay. I would love to know how I could further improve it so that it is of high quality yet is able to be written under examination time!!!
Thank you
Hi, I would love to receive feedback regarding this essay. I would love to know how I could further improve it so that it is of high quality yet is able to be written under examination time!!!
Thank you
Hey guys,
I have my half yearly's coming up (a week, freaking), and my teacher set us this question on Juries. So, I have a feeling it may be on the exam, possibly. So, right now I'm trying to slam the question as best as I can.
For one thing, the media reports that I use throughout are slightly old but they're really the best ones I could find, so does that make my point irrelevant?
Any critiques of yours would be great.
Cheers
Hi there,
I have attached my essay, is there any way I can cut back my response? Is there any thing else I need to work on? Thanks.
Beata
Hi there,
I have attached my essay, is there any way I can cut back my response? Is there any thing else I need to work on? Thanks.
Beata
Hello , I was wondering if it's alright if you mark my lockout essay?Hey Booboo123! Sure thing, I've popped your essay below with some feedback!
I'm not sure if I'm answering the question properly and it's not finished yet.
Cheers. :)
hello I was wondering if I could have essay marked :)
I was quite confused how to do this essay so all comments are appreciated
Thank you so much for your comments :D
Your help is extremely appreciated ;D
For para 1 I incorporated a case example to explain how statute and common law are similar and spent about 3-4 sentences doing this. How would I shorten these sentences while keeping the information?
For evaluation do you basically say that:
Drawn from the involvement of both statute and common law in the 'Native Title Act' (1993) and ‘Native Title Amendment Act (1998) the effectiveness of common law in creating a new precedent is supported by fulfilling the function of a altering the law in accordance with wishes of society specifically for Indigenous Australians.
For common law I am kind of confused on what aspects to say to support either its ineffective or effective...
If I wanted to integrate similarities and differences in paragraphs 1 and 2 would this be more effective in answer this question?
Would you explain 1 similarity they share and how and then explain 1 difference they have?
For differences: I basically know that there's a difference in sovereignty (statute over common law), common law made in courts and statute made in parliament. I couldn't find any other differences or examples of cases to use to explain these points.
Hello I'm back I rewrote my intro and first paragraph
I was wondering if I could get feedback asap because my inclass essay is tomorrow XO
Hey Jamon !
In keeping with my school's "prepare you for the end of the day" theme, I have been assigned yet another task which involves 1 of 2 possible 25mark essays being assessed on the due date.
They are:
1. To what extent has law reform achieved justice for family members in alternative family relationships? Include a discussion on same sex relationships and surrogacy and birth technologies.
2. To what extent has family law reform achieved just outcomes for family members experiencing problems? Include a discussion on the changing nature of parental responsibility and care and protection of children.
Hoping you can take a look at the draft i've done for the first essay :)
Thanks in advance !
Hey Essej!! This is a very cool theme, always working towards an end goal ;) your essay is below with some comments throughout!!Spoiler1. To what extent has law reform achieved justice for family members in alternative family relationships? Include a discussion on same sex relationships and surrogacy and birth technologies.
In contemporary society, shifting societal attitudes towards sexual orientation and technological developments have given rise to the need for reform in family law. Awesome introductory sentence. The ambiguous definition of the familial unit within the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) along with considerable legislative reform has seen an amelioration in inequalities faced by family members in relationships alternate to the nuclear one. Sophistication falls slightly with "the nuclear one," and further, the ambiguity in the FLA has not assisted in ameliorating inequality, rather, it sort of instigated it. Wording adjustment? Moreover, the introduction of unique situations arising from technological advancements such as in-vitro fertilisation and surrogacy has forced the legal system to adapt, in keeping with the overarching principle of the ‘best interests of the child’. It is clear that limitations are evident in the law’s ability to address issues of justice for evolving families, however concerted efforts have been made to ensure that justice prevails. A very solid Thesis paragraph, I like that the argument sits somewhere in the middle of good/bad, they are always more sophisticated.
In a changing society, the increase in alternative family relationships has seen a modification in Australia’s legal framework as new situations arise that compromise individual and collective equality. Recognition of De facto relationships, wherein two people live together in a bona fide domestic relationship without being married, is one such example. Great! However, I'd like to see an evaluative statement made here, your judgement should specifically form part of these opening sentences, and then you back it up in the paragraph. Despite encompassing approximately 10% of couples (2011), De facto relationships were not recognised in NSW until the passing of the De Facto Relationships Act 1984. Be sure to reference information correctly, where is this figure from (probably ABS), and ensure that (NSW) is on the end of your law. A change in societal perception through a disillusionment with the ‘requirement’ for marriage sparked such reforms, in which the criteria for heterosexual de facto relationships is clearly defined as “Lasting 2 or more years or having children involved” and “Demonstrating commitment to each other”. Details are slightly redundant, but the first bit is good to include. Also known as the Property (Relationships) Act 1984, this legislation achieved justice for alternate family relationships by ensuring that heterosexual unmarried couples gained legislative protection in issues of property division upon relationship breakdown. Good. These reforms were challenged in Davies v. Sparkes (1990). In this case, it was found that despite regular payments of “financial maintenance”, a stipulated characteristic of a de facto relationship, not enough features of such a relationship existed to warrant De facto status and therefore a monetary payment upon the breakdown of the relationship. Remember that you do NOT need to go into case details beyond a single phrase, like, "Davies v Sparkes (1990), a financial dispute surrounding the breakdown of a de-facto relationship." Focus on the legal issues coming out of the case. Keep it in if you prefer, but it is a little redundant. This lack of legal documentation was addressed in the opening of a NSW Relationship Register in 2010, which in the words of the NSW Attorney General, “will make it easier for unmarried couples to access legal entitlements and prove they are in a committed or de facto relationship”. Good use of quote. Through an increase in accessibility and recognition of de facto couples, it is evident that notwithstanding the time delay in adapting legal framework, the system has made effective attempts to achieve justice for those in alternative family relationships. Excellently argued, well done.
The justice which alternative family relationships ultimately achieve in the legal system can be further examined through the controversial contemporary issue of same-sex relationships. First phrase of that sentence was just slightly messy. Again, add a judgement! A lack of legal recognition of homosexual relationships within the Family Law Act (1961) (Cth) echoed contextual discrimination against the minority. However, changing social attitudes towards homosexual couples, as mirrored by a 2015 survey in which 74% of the Labor Party were in support of marriage equality (Up from 38% in 2004), have given rise to the necessity of law reform. Any reasons you took the Labor party, not the whole of society? Just curious. Time delays, a prevalent limitation of the legal system, play a large role in the lack of justice achieved for same-sex couples. It was not until the passing of the Property (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999 (NSW) that homosexual couples were given legal recognition. This act amended the aforementioned 1984 act to extend rights given to heterosexual couples to same-sex couples, specifically regarding inheritance, decision making in the event of death and compensation in line with the legal principle of equality. Legal recognition of same-sex couples in relation to health insurance was also granted in Hope and Brown v NIB (1994), affording same-sex couples further alignment with other familial relationships. That's a more efficient case reference there, excellent.
Moreover, in reforming the law the legal system aims to cement individual rights and freedoms; including the right to be free from prejudice. The enactment of the Same Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws - General Law Reform) Act 2008 in response to the 2007 Same-Sex: Same Entitlements report exemplified this. In amending 84 Commonwealth laws to eliminate discrimination against same-sex couples and their children in areas such as social security and child support, law reform can be seen to once more achieve justice for alternative family relationships. Excellent. The recurrent shortcoming of the law in time delays relating to same-sex couples was positively addressed in a 2010 SMH Article entitled “Could this be the year of the modern family?”. Referencing the Adoption Amendment (Same Sex Couples) Act 2010 (NSW), the author reveals the vast progression of same-sex law reform, stating that “NSW has finally made a claim to history by eliminating the last direct piece of legislative discrimination on the basis of sexuality”. Good use of media. It is likely that through allowing same-sex couples to adopt, the act will be a further impetus for “a shift in social, as well as legal, stigmas attached to same-sex families.” Clearly, the lengthy time inefficiencies within the legal system have once more inhibited the eventual prevalence of justice for those in same-sex relationships. Fantastic paragraph! However, the somewhat negative conclusion you draw at the end isn't exactly in line with the argument throughout, which is quite positive, do be a little careful. I'll also add that your expression in these paragraphs could be more succinct, you are going to need to cut words for an exam situation (probably), I'd cut them here.
Technological innovation in modern society is yet another condition which gives rise to law reform in the area of alternative family relationships. Add judgement. Artificial conception through in-vitro fertilisation raises a multitude of ethical questions regarding the treatment of human life as parental roles move past the simple “mother” and “father”. Slightly redundant comment, UNLESS you then relate it to some legal theme, right now it is just a comment in space. I can skip to the next one with no loss to meaning. In response to such technologies, the legal system has addressed the issues of status and parenthood in relation to embryos through the Status of Children Act 1996 (NSW). This legislation states that if a husband and wife use their own sperm and ova, the resulting child will have the same legal status as one conceived naturally, effectively redressing inequalities within society and the legal system. The Act also applies to parenthood in regards to IVF, stating ”When a woman becomes pregnant by using donor sperm from someone other than her husband, then that man is presumed not to be the father of the child born”. This notion of automatic “Presumption of paternity” was tested in B v J (1996), wherein the utilitarian reform allowed the Family Court to uphold that the man with whom the mother had a relationship with, not the sperm donor, was the legal father of the child. You need a conclusive statement here, just as before!
The limitations of the law in ethically questionable areas as technology changes is further demonstrated in the area of surrogacy. This sentence integrates your judgement, better. Surrogacy occurs when one woman agrees to fall pregnant and bear a child for a (usually childless) couple, who adopt the child when it is born. Don't define legal terms: Your reader knows this already! Whilst altruistic surrogacy, where a woman agrees to bear a child for no financial gain, is legal in Australia, its reverse, commercial surrogacy, is outlawed. Again, redundant information, focus on the analysis! The flaws within the legal system in regards to achieving justice for families in alternate relationships was brought forth in Re Michael (2009). This a nightmare case which demonstrated that an altruistic surrogacy in NSW did not lead to an adoption due to a lack of regulation by the NSW government. Be careful not to use expressive language like "nightmare," you must remain objective. With regard to the case itself, you need to draw out the implications of this more! The criminalisation of commercial surrogacy meanwhile in the Surrogacy Act 2011 (NSW), in response to growing negativity surrounding celebrity Nicole Kidman’s use of “gestational carriers” aims to redress the “dehumanisation” of women in such a process. NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith is quoted in a 2012 ABC “The Drum” article entitled “The surrogacy trap: why our laws need new life” explaining the practice is "unethical" and "not in the best interests of the mother or the child". Often ignored in the process, children’s basic rights can be seen to be disregarded in the prioritisation of resolving parenthood issues. However, social influences following the UN’s 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC) are evident in the Surrogacy reform’s focus on advancing the “best interests of the child”. Good inclusion of CROC here. In requiring independent counsellor’s report that parenthood transfers are “in the best interests of the child” it is evident that through law reform eventual justice has been achieved for all parties to an alternative familial relationship. This paragraph is noticeably weaker than the others (take this as a complement, because this paragraph is still exceptionally strong). It is content focused, try and shift over to focus more on evaluative analysis, and draw out implications from your examples more efficiently (analysis).
In summary, through a culmination of shifting societal attitudes towards sexual minorities as well as technological innovation, law reform has become a necessity in contemporary society. The rise in alternative family relationships has seen immense change in Australia’s legal framework, with time delays and initial disregard for the rights of children being the major limitations of the legal system in this area. Despite obvious flaws, overall law reform can be seen to eventually successfully achieve justice for those in alternative family relationships.Excellent, succinct conclusion, nicely done!
A thing of beauty Essej, seriously good work! I mostly picked on little things (there wasn't any big issues to fix), but you could write this in the HSC and score EXCEPTIONALLY well. Be sure to keep the focus on analysis (no redundant case details or definition of legal terms), you occasionally stray ever so slightly into 'content vomit.' Further, some structural things to fix, primarily adding your judgement to your topic sentences in each paragraph. This is vital to set up your evaluation from the start.
Great work Essej, very very hard to fault! ;D
Thanks Jamon !
Unfortunately as I was working on the other parts of the assessment, I won't be able to resend you my edited draft! Apologies :'(
However i've definitely improved my essay with your recommendations and completely forgot about adding judgement to my topic sentences and vomiting content when i fell into a writing lull, thanks for reminding me!
Haha i was given the support of marriage equality statistic by my teacher, and much to my surprise when i checked up on it it regarded the labor party! I guess to justify it I would say that over time government perception (in addition to societal) regarding marriage equality has changed, and of course even though labor aren't in power right now parliament is where the changes can best take effect.
I'm more than likely going to remove the de facto paragraph when writing the actual essay as a) it's not required in the question and b) my essay is way too long :P .
But once again thanks heaps, hope to see you back on the forums soon!
Hey guys! Can I please get feedback for my family law essay?
Specific issues:
- I feel like my arguments are imbalanced or are not satisfactorily proved
- Are there enough LCMs?
Thanks so much
Hey, was wondering if one of you guys could read my draft before its due on Monday and see where i can improve on
I edited my property paragraph i guess but i still dont think i gave enough of an analysis and not sure what else to chuck in. Was wondering what could i add to make this paragraph up to par
Should i just focus on the Property Relationships ACt? i had a part about it but i removed it because i was over the word limit
I reworked my old paragraph but i cant seem to find any case/media articles on it
Constant law reform for same-sex relationships has seen increased effectiveness of the law in resolving conflict. The Property (Relationships) Act 1999(NSW) was reformed to allow same-sex couples to be considered de-facto giving them rights in regards to property division. Prior to this act, the surviving partner would have to lodge a claim under the Family Provisions Act 1982(NSW) as a dependant. This reflects the effectiveness of the law, as same-sex couples had the same access to the law as with heterosexual families. Furthermore, the Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and other Measures) Act 2008(CTH) gave equality for same-sex couples under family law by allowing access to Courts for property settlement nationwide. The ability for same-sex couples to access Federal courts whilst disputing property matters highlights the increasing effectiveness of the law when dealing with conflict surrounding same-sex families. Thus the law can be perceived to be increasingly effective when dealing with property matters of same-sex couples.
Thanks
Hello again guys!
I was just wondering whether you would be able to look at this essay sometime today. I don't mean to pressure you but it's due tomorrow and I would really like some feedback. Don't worry, if you guys are busy I totally understand - I shouldn't have left it to the last minute!
The question is on workplace law and is written inside the document. I know this sounds shallow but what I would particularly like to know is whether it is band 6 material. If not, what improvements could be made to make it so?
Thanks again!
This is a state sovereignty question I have done, but it is my first World Order essay ever and I am sure there are a bunch of areas that can be improved, would you be able to have a look over it and give me some basic pointers?
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated - BTW big thanks to the stall you guys had at the HSC expo earlier this day, it was a godsend
Thanks for the detailed response, I really appreciate it and have made a fair few changes for the better. I was wondering if you would be able to critique another essay of mine as I am having extreme difficulty in structuring a cohesive response to the question.
Any help would be appreciated whatsoever
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Hey I was wondering if you could please have a look at my essay and see if it is logical, also could you give it a mark out of 25? Be as harsh as you want, the more critique the better!! Also if you could let me know if my thesis is evident throughout because I never really know how to balance an argument or make it strong!! I know that none of the markers probably have done Indigenous but just from a general point of view please.
I haven't written an intro or conclusion yet just a thesis.
Thank you in advance :)
Compare the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in recognising the rights if indigenous peoples.
This is another world order essay I was wondering if you could critique, mainly the coherence of it as whole if that's okay
Hi! I have attached an essay on World Order that I would love some feedback on!
Areas Im concerned with:
-introduction
-coherency throughout the essay
-evaluation of my points
-not sure if I have enough examples/articles
Thanks so much!
Kristen
haha yeah it is very long! Its for an assignment due on Tuesday and the word limit is 3000 words.
Thanks so much for your comments :)
Hello again friends!
When one of you has some spare time, I was wondering if someone would be able to take a look at this essay on trade unions (in the Workplace topic). Unlike my last legal essay, no time limit on this one so take as much time as you need :D
In particular, I would like some specific feedback on the structure of my essay and the way I have tacked the question. Any other feedback would of course, be welcome also!
Thanks again!
Hello, I need some help with my crime and consumer essays!
Crime essay, I gave my teacher this as a practice and they said it was a definite 13/15 and they gave me some pointers but I'm still not sure how to improve it
- My introductions and conclusions are VERY weak
- My evaluations and incorporation for evidence could be better but I'm not sure how I can improve it (can you show me through an example how to improve it?)
My biggest problem is being able to think on the spot and write all of this information in 40 minutes, it's a bit overwhelming, especially with crime where it can be so specific at times, so could you give me some pointers on how to do that?
Thank you so much, and I truly appreciate your help :D :D :D
Hello!
This is an legal essay on Indigenous People, and although it isn't a very popular choice for the HSC, I was just wondering if I was please able to recieve some external feedback and a rough mark out of 25 if there was time.
Many thanks!
Hello, I need some help with my crime and consumer essays!
Consumer essay, I wrote this for a question I had gotten in an exam, haven't completed it but I would like to know if I'm on the right path, my concerns are
- evaluation
- if i'm answering the question
If there are any issues or things I could do better even if it's small tell me, I need all the criticism I can get
My biggest problem is being able to think on the spot and write all of this information in 40 minutes, it's a bit overwhelming, especially with crime where it can be so specific at times, so could you give me some pointers on how to do that?
Thank you so much, and I truly appreciate your help :D :D :D
Hey there! I'll have a look :)
You know the drill, comments in bold throughout :)SpoilerAssess the effectiveness of trade unions in protecting workplace rights
Trade unions, associations of workers with a common goal of improving working conditions, have been for the most part, extremely effective in protecting workplace rights. Although declining in effectiveness contemporarily, awkward word here, perhaps, "in recent/modern times"? trade unions in the past were immensely consequential in safeguarding basic workplace rights. Nevertheless, despite this diminishing influence, it is irrefutable that historically, trade unions have been extremely effective in upholding workplace rights. I'd perhaps add a tiny tiny bit of context to beef up this intro - perhaps saying that the labor movement, the trade union movement, blah blah, gained momentum in the decade of .... (I don't know when). This might give you just a little more to anchor the essay in at the start. I see you've mentioned the history throughout, but start it here :) Great judgement, by the way! Really unique.
Trade unions have played an extremely effective role during the early years of federation. Of critical importance was the establishment of Australia’s principal workplace tribunal, the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, established under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 (Cth). This act, largely advocated for by the burgeoning trade union movement, represents an extremely effective attempt aimed at safeguarding workplace rights, emphasising the importance of conciliation and arbitration as alternative dispute resolution mechanism and ensuring that workers were able to have their cases heard. Further, the court was also bequeathed unprecedented power to determine and enforce an award, enshrining basic employee rights and minimum conditions in a manner that was significantly effective in protecting workplace rights. This principle of fair working terms and conditions was further affirmed in Ex parte H.V McKay (1907), which established a living wage for workers. Although trade unions were not directly affiliated with this case, it is evident that their advocacy of worker’s rights clearly influenced the decision of the bench which in turn, positively impacted workplace rights for many years. As a result of trade union activity in this instance, Australia was already in compliance with the precepts elaborated by the constitution of the International Labor Organisation (ILO) established in 1919, an international organisation dedicated to promoting worker’s rights. Hence trade unions have undoubtedly played a key and effective role in safeguarding workplace rights during Australia’s early federation years. This is wonderful! Great knowledge, no waffling, clear dates, a case study, and analysis! Seriously, AMAZING!
Moreover, trade unions have exercised a both pivotal and effective role in promoting workplace rights, chiefly through their opposition to WorkChoices. Again, another brilliant and unique thesis!As a result of the Workplace Relations Amendment (WorkChoices) Bill 2005 (Cth) workplace rights had been severely curtailed, eliminating the ‘no-disadvantage test’ and restricting the ability of unions to engage in collective bargaining. For instance, Simon Kokinovski, a worker at the Arrowcrest Group’s Tristar factory was fired without any redundancy payout. This was only made possible under the WorkChoices and unions were unable to effectively fight for his employee rights as their bargaining power had been depleted. (‘No WorkChoices at the 'Torture Factory’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 2007). As I was reading this, I thought "mmm..I hope there's evidence to back this up for a marker" and then I see the media article! Spot on!In response, trade unions once again demonstrated their effectiveness in advocating for workplace rights via their staunch opposition to this legislation. Led by their peak body, the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), trade unions strongly campaigned against the legislation, launching the‘Your Rights At Work’ information campaign, a programme aimed at raising collective awareness of workplace rights. As a direct result of trade union advocacy, the incumbent Coalition government was defeated and WorkChoices repealed. These developments therefore illustrate the efficacy of trade unions in not only protecting worker’s rights by opposition harmful legislation, but also an ability to guide public opinion towards greater acceptance of employee rights.Thus, the effectiveness of trade unions is aptly illustrated through their opposition to the WorkChoices policy. I love a paragraph that ends how it should. Yours always do!
Additionally, the effectiveness of trade unions is further emphasised through their involvement in establishing the Fair Work Commission (FWC) and in formulating the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Restoring Australia’s compliance with the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (2008), the act not only removed the deleterious provisions of the previous WorkChoices legislation, but also enshrined under statute law, a commitment to upholding workplace rights across Australia. This is evident through such landmark reforms like the codification of a 38 hour working week as one of 10 National Employment Standards elucidated in the act. The FWC has also been an extremely effective measure in upholding workplace rights, achieved largely to the pressure exerted by trade unions on government, ensuring greater access to dispute resolution mechanisms such as the Fair Work Ombudsman. The advocacy of trade unions has also ensured that a national minimum wage has been established and protected, determined by the FWC annually, further illustrating their efficacy. Hence, the success of the Fair Work Act and the prominent role that trade unions played in developing the legislation, encapsulates the effectiveness of trade unions in advocating for workplace rights.
On the other hand however, in recent years, particularly following the successful passage of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), the effectiveness of trade unions in promoting workplace rights has precipitously diminished. This has primarily occurred due to an acceleration in the decline of trade union membership. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, less than 15% of all Australian workers apart of a trade union. This decline therefore reflects the diminishing clout that trade unions possess, thereby illustrating a clear and growing limitation on their effectiveness in promoting workplace rights. Ironically, the efficacy of trade unions has been further eroded due to their previous success. Having achieved over a century of progress on workplace rights, trade unions are now perceived as though unnecessary. A 2014 poll conducted by the Canberra Times, vindicates this, with 65% of those surveyed believing unions no longer had any effect on the operation of their workplace. Finding the name for this poll and perhaps the publication date is very important. At the moment it sounds a bit airy fairy. I don't think you made it up, of course, but you need to leave no doubt! :) This apathetic attitude has meant that trade unions are not as influential as they once were in effectuating workplace change, therefore hampering their effectiveness.
Furthermore, the effectiveness of trade unions as vehicles for improving workplace rights has declined as the public image of unions has become tarnished. Cases of corruption have damaged the reputation of trade unions as bodies purely interested in advancing the rights of its members. For instance, scandal such as that surrounding the Australian Workers Union (AWU) in which the union was reported to have conscripted bikie gangs to collect outstanding debt has no doubt, adversely affected the perception of trade unions. (‘Trade Unions Using Bikies to Collect Debts’, The Australian, 2016). This is again emphasised in FWA v Thompson (2015) in which disgraced Labor parliamentarian, Craig Thompson, was found guilty of defrauding the Health Services Union, whose members he was supposed to represent. Collectively, these incidences of ethically dubious behaviour have severely damaged the reputation of trade unions and thus, have limited their effectiveness in promoting workplace rights due to the increasing negative publicity. Hence, it is clear that the effectiveness of trade unions as mechanisms for protecting workplace rights has been severely depleted.
In essence, it is clear that on the whole, trade unions have historically been extremely effective in not only establishing, but improving workplace rights across Australia. Despite decreasing effectiveness and influence in the modern age however, trade unions nevertheless still play an important role in protecting workplace rights. Two sentences for a conclusion doesn't quite to justice to the amazing essay I just read. Explicitly talk about some of the examples you gave, if you think that will work. That is my suggestion :)
I'm so pleased to say that this is the work of a Band 6 student! Congratulations. You've done an excellent job here. Your structure isn't flawed, in my opinion! Any little things that would benefit from tidying up, I mentioned :) Your inclusion of media articles and case studies is very smooth. If you had the opportunity, I'd try provide a case study in each paragraph (only because you're at such a high level already). This won't be easy, or perhaps even possible. I haven't studied workplace so I'm not sure. But if you can find a few little extra ones here or there that have some worth, name drop them in :)
I hope this helps, although I definitely didn't help a lot! You've got this one down pat. Feel free to edit and repost at a later date if you want us to have another look with fresh eyes. I do worry that because there is so much accurate, fine details here, that you won't be able to remember all of this so seamlessly in an exam. Is this for an assignment?
All the best :)
Once more, thanks so much - I am in your debt :D
Hi!
This essay of mine is due Tuesday but unfortunately i haven't finished it all yet. Would really appreciate some feedback on the stuff i have so far.
A really great essay here itswags!! I think it is structured really clearly (well defined introductions and conclusions which is great), excellent ideas presented, and I think you've done a great job incorporating cases!! You also were evaluating your ideas very effectively throughout.
In some areas, I'd like to see you go into an idea with more detail or present more evidence (EG - the comparison of injunctions and AVO's was brilliant, I'd love to see that carried through the entire paragraph actually!). This will just give you a more convincing argument. Some more succinct expression would help this in areas as well, to maximise the impact of your ideas for the marker.
On the whole, really great ideas here!! Just some additions and tidy-ups in places would make them shine even more, great work!! ;D
hey, can you please mark these /25 ! currently struggling a lot in legal just need some thorough feedback please !
oh so sorry i completely forgot about that ! i will ensure i reach the limit thank you
Hi! just wondering if it would be alright to get an opinion on an essay, just the intro as i want to see if my writing is good and where i could maybe improve
thank you! (if i need to post more so that i go with the essay marking rules just let me know :)
for family
evaluate the effectiveness of legal and non legal responses to same sex relationships
hey, can you please mark these /25 ! currently struggling a lot in legal just need some thorough feedback please !
Hi there! I'll jump on this now :)
I'll pop it in a spoiler here with my comments written in bold throughout :) This doesn't need 5 posts to qualify because it is just a paragraph :)SpoilerChanging societal values, greater acceptance and reduced stigma pertaining to same sex relationships has beeneffectivelyresponded to by bothI would switch this around and say the legal and non-legal responses have responded to the values, acceptance and reduced stigma. So the section I crossed out, I would swap for the words "prompting effective change in..." Or, you can just rearrange the sentence to suit your style :) legal and non legal responses to a large extent. Although, the community specify which community you are referring to :) experiences conflicting views on the family matter as the nature of homosexuality can clash with cultural and religious beliefs, which has been restricting on the law meeting the needs of those in same sex relationships. we have witnessed this as these couples still face inequality when it comes to legal marriage where the statute of the Marriage Amendment Act (2004) cth by the John Howard government reinforced the notion displayed in the Marriage Act (1961) cth and the Hyde v Hyde and Woodmansee (1866) defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. This is a really long sentence, so definitely consider splitting it up into two or three smaller ones. Later on in your body paragraphs, make sure you give specific examples of how the religious views affects law. For example, the current federeal party's stance towards a plebiscite, and you can also include various quotes from parliamentarians or other law-making figures who have commented on their views of marriage equality in legislation.Nevertheless, the discrimination and oppression of same sex couples as previously derived from not just the law but other aspects of society has been effectively responded to by extensive law reform including the same sex relationships (equal treatment in commonwealth laws - general law reform) act 2008 cth amending 85 laws that held discrimination against same sex couples. Law reform has evolved an enormous amount to assist in protecting the rights of same sex couples as well as changing values within society. I tend to think that because your initial judgement is that the law reform is effective, that you should put this last section of the paragraph before the marriage equality section. And then bring in the marriage equality section with something like, "the greatest area of potential reform in public discussion at the moment is marriage equality..." You won't have to put in the legislation or the Hyde case in the introduction this way, because it will be left like a teaser for what is yet to come in your body paragraph. I'm indifferent towards using legislation in your introduction, I don't see it is a wrong or right thing to do!
You've really given yourself a lot of scope for your essay here which is great! With some small adjustments, I think you've got a lot of great stuff happening here! I mean, you've not only made a great thesis by focusing on the idea of reform (so important for this same sex relationship topic, because the developments can be mapped on a historical timeline), but you've also clearly outlined where you will be going with this essay, which gives it awesome strength. If I were you, I'd be really proud of this! Great effort!
hey, can you please mark these /25 ! currently struggling a lot in legal just need some thorough feedback please !
hahaha ! thank you heaps, i know there would be a lot of faults, >:(legal isn't my biggest strength !
Hey Mods!
Just for something a little different, i've written an essay on shelter in preparation for trials from a past paper, just to try and get a feel for the sort of language used in this topic.
I understand none of the mods did shelter as an elective, but it's been a while since i've written a legal essay and would appreciate some general feedback! No rush as it is just revision.
The question is "Evaluate the role of the law in enforcing the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants"
Thanks in Advance ! ;D ;D ;D
Hey Essej! I was wondering when I'd be marking something for you again ;) I'll do my best given that I didn't do Shelter, it's attached below with comments in bold!!SpoilerEvaluate the role of the law in enforcing the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants (25 marks)
The process of leasing shelter is one which raises a plethora of issues in regards to the legal protection of the respective rights of landlords and tenants. The law makes concerted efforts to amend violations of such rights through the provision of legislative obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (NSW). The landlord and tenant relationship is protected to a largely successful extent under existing legal framework through both law reform and the creation of dispute resolution mechanisms. It is through the structured resolution of inequities faced through issues such as termination, damages and repairs by courts and tribunals that the rights of each party are effectively enforced. Thus, despite limitations, the enforcement of the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants bound by parliamentary legislation primarily ensures that justice prevails. Great introduction, not much I'd add, think it works excellently!
The owners of rental properties, or landlords, are effectively bound and protected by the law in the arrangement and maintenance of leasing agreements. Be sure that your introductions link to the rights and obligations you talked about in the Thesis, keep the Thesis sustained! The Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) 1987 (NSW) makes clear the obligations of the landlord in regards to providing copies of the tenancy agreement to the tenant and to keep the premises in reasonable repair. Further, stated obligations that the landlord must provide locks and quiet enjoyment of vacant premises enforce the later Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) in protecting the tenant's right to both privacy and safety. Through these prescribed responsibilities, the law effectively fosters a prosperous tenancy arrangement that protects both parties to a leasing agreement by preventing unhealthy imbalances in power by the lessor. Good. In order to protect the right of the landlord to a premises free of damages, the legal system ensures that bonds lodged with the Rental Bond Board may be utilised for repairs, pursuant to the Landlord and Tenant (Rental Bonds) Act 1977 (NSW). This further allows for the achievement of justice through protecting property value whilst impartially preventing the landlord from using the bond for their personal needs, thus protecting the tenant.Great. A practical application of such tenancy disputes was evidenced in Bhatt v. Skyton Holdings Pty Ltd (Tenancy) 2009 wherein the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) held that damage done to the property by Bhatt was sufficient grounds for the landlord to use Bhatt’s rental security ($822) to repair the property. Breaches of the RTA by the tenant in this case successfully yielded justice for the landlord and thus safeguarded their right to use rental security to preserve the value of the premises. Overall it is clear that the rights and obligations of landlords are sufficiently encompassed by the law. Not much I can suggest at all in this paragraph, it works extremely well! I do think you could make your expression slightly more succinct by removing some details about the evidence you are presenting, blending things from two sentences into one with some more clever word choice, etc. This would leave room for more of the evaluative analysis style sentences!
Through law reform, occupants of rental property are equally accounted for by the legal system, provided compliance is made with legislation. I think the evaluation in this introduction needs to be a little stronger, make your stance clear! The RTA Amendment in 2010 modernised and updated the law in line with current practices, reducing dispute levels through a greater clarity in laws. Any statistic you have to support that at all? In regards to termination, landlords must provide 90 days of “without grounds” notice to a tenant in periodic tenancy, an increase of 30 days from the previous act. This just outcome allows for a greater time period by which the tenant can organise alternate shelter. Here is an example of something you could streamline: See my chat below. Whilst legislation does not exist to protect the right to shelter, it is indisputable that in allowing for greater leniency the law enforces its responsibility to provide shelter to the greatest extent under the current legal framework. Does the fact that there is no legislation act as a weakness of the legal response? Maybe? The tenant's right to appeal a ‘without grounds’ termination notice to the supreme court, as stipulated under the original RTA legislation, was demonstrated in Roads and Traffic Authority v. Joy Swain and Terence Gold (1997). The use of judicial discretion in taking into account the “circumstances of the case” fairly balanced the rights of the tenant and the landlord’s right to issue “without grounds termination”. Evident here is the limitation of the legal system in achieving just outcomes for all parties to a tenancy dispute as the tenants were forced to find alternate accommodation. Further legislative protection under the RTA reforms hold that a landlord must not unreasonably withhold consent to a fixture/alteration of minor nature such as a hook. Brought about by growing concerns surrounding the safety of women in response to emergency domestic violence issues (by which women could change locks if required), the law effectively enforces the obligations of landlords in order to protect the tenant’s right to safety. Evidently, the law plays a significant role in the maintenance of tenancy obligations and rights. I think this conclusion needs to again link to law reform like your introduction did, it seems a little out of place.
The creation of dispute resolution mechanisms provides a successful avenue for the protection of both landlord and tenant rights through heightened accessibility and resource efficiency. Perfect intro! Provided for under the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW), NCAT is the primary body dealing with tenancy disputes. With the powers to make legally binding decisions regarding breaches of Residential Tenancy Agreements, the tribunal is an authoritative and ultimately effective measure in ensuring obligations and rights of landlords and tenants are successfully met and enforced. Fantastic. In Rouvellas v. Culley (Tenancy) 2009, NCAT was able to grant tenants ongoing rent reductions and compensation for breaches of their right to safety and to premises in “reasonable repair” pursuant to the RTA. Link to effectiveness/ineffectiveness? Moreover, NCAT is available in over 10 different languages, reflecting social conditions of multiculturalism that often inhibit the achievement of justice for those leasees from foreign backgrounds. In addition to the residential proceedings fee of only $47, NCAT can be seen as both accessible and cost efficient for those involved in the dispute. Further, resolutions are often found much faster than if disputes were taken to the supreme court, with termination hearings occurring within 3 weeks of applications. It is through such judicial measures that the law strongly enforces individual rights to ensure compliance with tenancy regulations. Great paragraph, this one was much more succinct and I really like it!!
In summary, the legal enforcement of the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants is largely successful in attaining just outcomes for those involved in leasing agreements. Legislative restrictions and reform implemented by the NSW state government ensure that individuals are able to access the legal system and resolve disputes through NCAT in an efficient and effective manner. Further, under the leasing framework imposed by the RTA, it can be seen that the legal system effectively sets out balanced rights and obligations to ensure a prosperous rental relationship. Great conclusion, again, no suggestions!
A fantastic essay here Essej, not much I can suggest at all because you are doing almost everything right!! Fantastic evidence, fantastic structure, fantastic conceptual drive, fantastic... Well pretty much everything is fantastic! ;D basically my challenge for you now is to push yourself further. What you are doing works well! But you can work harder to squeeze even more quality out of your word limit ;)
First, expression. In some cases you spend 2 or 3 sentences explaining something that could take only 1 (at a push). This might be because you are including unnecessary details (particularly for cases). However, it is something that comes with practice!
Here is an example of streamlining expression:
In regards to termination, landlords must provide 90 days of “without grounds” notice to a tenant in periodic tenancy, an increase of 30 days from the previous act. This just outcome allows for a greater time period by which the tenant can organise alternate shelter.
Becomes:
The 30 day increase to the minimum "without grounds" notice period implemented by this amendment grants additional time for tenants to find alternative accomodation, effectively protecting the right to shelter.
About 1/3 of the words were cut there (excuse any incorrect info for the Option), and you can easily bounce to the next piece of evidence. Basically, challenge yourself to be as succinct as possible to make room for more analysis!
Second, make sure your evaluation is made super obvious throughout the response. Every piece of evidence should be evaluated, and should be evaluated in terms of the rights and responsibilities you talk about in your Thesis! The question is evaluate, pretty much every sentence should have that judgemental flavour to it ;D
Third, media articles!! And also reports, and also international treaties if applicable. More varied evidence would be great!
Finally, in your Thesis you mention limitations. I don't get too much of this in the body. While it's not essential, having two sided arguments played against each other well is a very clever thing and will really stand you out to the marker! Once you make room for more evaluation/analysis, maybe try mixing it up a little! Develop a broader view of the issue with some negatives! ;D
In reality though, not much I can suggest. You're definitely still on track to smash Legal Studies with essays like this, great work!! Sorry my feedback isn't as thorough as usual, Shelter does seem like an interesting option! ;D
Thanks once again Jamon! I understand you've been flooded with essays in english and legal and really appreciate you getting back to me so quickly!
I was really annoyed by the prescribed question :3 there were few media articles I could find and that made it harder for me to discuss limitations through no real media coverage of "legal failure to protect rights/obligations as such". I guess that comes with more research - i'll definitely have the full array of LCMs in my final response for you :P
I'll definitely work harder to incorporate my thesis in my topic sentences (and sustain that specific one throughout the response) and be extra judgemental at every possible opportunity - thanks for alerting me to that :)
As always, cheers Jamon!
Would you be able to look over my assignment? It's not an essay, just 3 short answers...
Hi, i was just wondering if you'd be able to comment on my workplace law essay. It's the first essay I've written for workplace and its for an upcoming assessment task. I don't feel as though this essay is up to my usual standard but am having trouble in finding ways to improve. Any comments will be greatly appreciated. The question is "Assess the role of law reform in recognising rights and enforcing responsibilities of both employees and employers. " :)
can someone help me with the protection of victims in the criminal justice system ??
yes yes i really need help, in protecting the rights of victims in the criminal justice system - what would i include within a paragraph ??
Hello
I really need help with my report :'(
I don't have any idea on how to structure it or what I am supposed to write about
On the list another world! You've caught me on a busy half of the week, so it could be slower than normal, apologies in advance! ;D
Thats okay :D
I appreciate you letting me now and your willingness to give me feedback for my report ;D
Hi I'm back I was wondering if could get feedback on what I have done so far.
I am a bit confused on how to fulfil these aspects that we get marks on and how well I've done it so far. I'm struggling with analysis in particular :'(
I have only been listing advantages and disadvantages at this point ???
- Presents a logical well-structured report that compares and contrasts the two electoral systems
- Analyses relevant features of the two systems
- Analyses the strengths and weaknesses of the two systems
- Makes a sound judgement about the merits of the two systems (taking differing views into account)
- Uses relevant examples relating to both systems
- Uses relevant political and legal terminology and concepts.
Could I please get a reply as soon as possible? My report is due friday and i'll need to print it out on Thursday
Hi I was hoping someone could read my world order essay. My marks haven't exceeded 23/25 even though I incorporated all my teachers feedback. What would improve it and make it flexible for the hsc?
Thanks!
Hey, this is a Family Law essay i wrote quite a while back on Surrogacy and birth technologies. I would really appreciate the feedback. I know i sometimes write more simply than others, but hopefully my work still shows sophistication. Also the idea of posting my essay for eveyone to see terrifies me, since the essays ive skim read so far, sound so good.
But dont let that stop you from being harsh... i promise not to cry too much :P
Hey there! Definitely can give your essay a read, I'll do my best to help you get you that 25/25 ;) your essay is attached with feedback throughout in bold!!SpoilerWorld leaders converging in the United Nations building in New York City, pass a replica of Picasso’s Guernica painting, a poignant depiction of the horrors of war. Very interesting first sentence. The tapestries significance lies in the UN’s origins and their endeavour to ensure world order through peaceful means (UN Charter, 1945). International law has become a prominent force in achieving peace, relying on international cooperation and respect to maintain healthy relationships between nation states and significant bodies. This reveals the inherently contradictory structure of international law, relying on political will to achieve order. Overall, this is a solid (and definitely engaging) introduction. Be careful your less than typical approach doesn't detract from the purpose of the introduction: To set out your argument. I'm not getting much of an OPINION here, ensure you develop one when responding to a question. Further, try setting out what your paragraphs will cover in your intro to orient the reader.
The 2005 UN recognition of the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) was hailed as “the most significant adjustment to sovereignty” (Gilbert). A decade prior, a vicious civil war left 800,000 Rwandans dead in 3 months, with little international acknowledgement. Again, this introductory sentence(s) isn't really developing an opinion, or an analytical position. I'm looking for you to make it clear where you stand on the UN R2P; how effective is it? The UN's attempted ceasefires were undermined by the Security Council (UNSC) lack of political will , preventing the peacekeeping mission from using force to protect civilians, rendering them ineffective (Swedish MP Carlsson). The mastermind behind the genocide had relied on a lack of international response, allowing them to escape justice until 2008 when the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda set a landmark in sentencing officer Bagosora to life imprisonment for crimes of war. Try to approach this information a little more analytically; right now you are siting on a more retell-driven style of delivery. Still, the impossibility of bringing each individual to justice emphasised the need to prevent this happening again. Addressing this failure, R2P attempted to reconcile the need to protect world order and state sovereignty. So reading this whole paragraph, it reads like a historical context paragraph. Not much analysis, just facts and a bit of recount. It works, but there are better ways to use your words to actually analyse situations and draw your own conclusions about the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of legal mechanisms.
R2P has since been criticised as a “rhetorical presence” lacking substance due to the UN's failure to apply it to Syria (Washington Post, 2015). Like your inclusion of quotes/media references, very effective way to present popular opinion. Conflict in Syria developed in 2012 from hostilities between the dictatorial government of Assad and its opponents. Still recounting here. International interventions failures has seen increasing involvement from neighbouring countries and violent militia groups, threatening the peace of the Middle East and further. Masses of evidence have been widely reported, alleging Assad’s violations of the conduct of hostilities including using chemical weapons, indicating non compliance with the Hague Convention, 1899 and Geneva Convention, 1949. Good laws to mention, but what does this demonstrate to you about the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of R2P? I'm looking for more conventional: This evidence shows that R2P is ineffective, this evidence shows it actually is somewhat effective, etc etc. You aren't evaluating/analysing, you are recounting, with little bits of analysis sneaking in.
Despite international condemnation, prosecution is obstructed by the nations not being signatories to the Rome Statute. Thus they’re beyond the International Criminal Court's (ICC) jurisdiction, an intergovernmental body prosecuting individuals for international crimes. This reveals R2P flaws; its success relies on the motivations of those charged with its implementation. Good. The ICC may only review cases referred from the UNSC and has limited ability to enforce rulings, revealing a need for reform. This manifested in the ICC failed attempt to meet R2P by prosecuting Sudanese President Hassan for genocide. This is better; I'd love to see this sort of analysis developed further with a more typical paragraph structure. The court's failure undermined its authority, as have political divisions within the UNSC. Russia and China have vetoed Syrian referral to the ICC, highlighting UNSC inequality and the need for cooperation in achieving world order (SMH, 2011).
The most significant other attempt was the Syrian Peace Process backed by the Arab League. Coordinated by a UN envoy, the Annan Plan 2012 initiated political negotiations. Recount. However it failed due to a lack of resources and “passive rules of engagement” authorised for the Monitoring Mission, paralleling Rwanda. Bilateral sanctions and political isolation of the state have also proved largely ineffective. This paragraph adds nothing to your argument; you have already proved this point. Move on to new things!
Meanwhile, extremist militant group ISIS began establishing a caliphate in Syria, threatening regional security. In 2015, a coalition of nations including Australia launched a Syrian airstrike targeting these terrorist groups, employing force to deter and protect. Recounting. Whilst uniting to protect world order shows a degree of successful cooperation, the airstrikes disregard the conduct of hostilities allowed by the UN Charter only when sanctioned by the UNSC or for self defence. Tell me more? Similarly, conversation at 2015 G20 summit surrounded the deployment of peacekeepers in a buffer zone, revealing increasing cooperation to resolve conflict (ABC News, 2015).
Alternatively, Amnesty International has strived to restore peace through negotiations and campaigns, releasing media statements on human rights abuses. The NGO aims to persuade the international community to take more definitive action, calling specifically for an embargo against arm transfers to Syria. The Red Cross have also issued calls for the “immediate and simultaneous” (Gasser) lifting of sieges to allow humanitarian aid to over 400,000 people. The complex nature of this conflict has revealed systemic flaws which may only be overcome by reform or political will. While current measures have produced little success, the commitment of nations to cooperating suggests hope for conflict resolution. I like that you are mentioning NGO's, it adds depth to the typical UN dominated World Order essay, but you still need to be evaluating! Don't just tell me WHAT they do, tell me HOW WELL it addresses world order issues!
Since the 1945 detonation of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima, the greatest threat to global security is posed by weapons of mass destruction, with over 16,000 nuclear weapons distributed amongst just 9 nations. While the UN condemned the use of nuclear weapons in war, it wasn’t realised until NATO persuaded nations to sign the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) 1968. In 2003 Britain, USA and Australia, fearing the UN were ineffective, undermined calls for peace by invading Iraq on the basis of WMD. The 2016 Chilcot Report since revealed military action was unnecessary, revealing a lack of compliance and lack of commitment to world order. (SMH 2016) My fear with this short paragraph structure is that you aren't committing to a viewpoint or analysis; these feel like extracts from multiple essays (see below).
In 1991, the UNSC persuaded Iraq to dismantle all nuclear weapons but was not effective until 2002, when Iraq submitted to weapons inspections. This was similarly demonstrated by US President Obama’s successful negotiation with Iran, exchanging weapons inspections for the lifting of sanctions (BBC, 2015). Recount. These demonstrate the continued international commitment to peace. As negotiations continue, including the 1983 bilateral SORT treaty between USA and USSR, nuclear stockpiles have been greatly reduced, although many are not disabled. A single weapon can cause significant damage, demanding further reform, such as the Australian International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). ICAN is likely to achieve their goal of a UN treaty which abolishes the possession of nuclear weapons, with reports of a conference in 2017. Thus, the success of global cooperation is evident as having lessened the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. This is a better conclusive sentence.
North Korean violations of the conduct of hostilities through the detonation of nuclear weapons over recent years has earned it significant global condemnation for the threat it poses to global security (SMH, 2016). After withdrawing from the NPT in 2003, the General Assembly and UNSC isolated the state, placing trade sanctions to coerce cooperation. These were largely ineffective against the state which continues to violate UN resolutions and Geneva Conventions, using state sovereignty to refuse international intervention. In order to protect regional security, South Korea and America have discussed deploying a deterrent mission, ignoring UN rulings and ironically threatening peace. Whilst non legal measures have been more effective, the problem will remain ongoing until all weapons are dismantled.
The commitment of the broader international community to maintaining world peace is evident as a significant success of the system. A variety of mechanisms exist through various organs with the sole intention of protecting humanity. However the complex nature of modern conflict requires mass cooperation to resolve. Thus the effectiveness of mechanisms varies, affected by the political motivations of states, and the nature of state sovereignty. Despite some failures, the proven willingness of nations to cooperate and the recognition of the global responsibility to protect reveals an unprecedented potential for world order.
Not too many comments throughout actually, because most of my comments are over-arching and apply to your essay as a whole rather than individual sections!
First of all, your writing style is fabulous. You've got a lot of flair here; you are clear and sophisticated, and demand attention where attention is due. That's fantastic. You also clearly have excellent content knowledge, you have a lot of case studies and examples, and I love your inclusion of media references. Excellent on all those fronts :)
My concerns with this essay are two fold. First, your structure. You have a very atypical structure, characterised by very short paragraphs covering a broad range of world order issues and ideas. My concern with this is that none of your ideas are fully developed. Your essay is, for lack of a better way to express it, a bit all over the place. I don't have a logical train of thought because you are jumping between your ideas so quickly, without proper introduction and conclusion, and without linking what you discuss to a greater idea.
Because you have so many ideas, and because few of them are linked to any kind of central idea: This essay reads more like a set of excerpts from different world order essays than a single, cohesive, body of writing.
I would recommend you try to use fewer, but longer, paragraphs that fully flesh out your ideas! Something like: Responsibility to Protect, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and NGO's, could work well (but it would be difficult for you to link them under a central idea). You also need to work on properly introducing your concept by linking it to the grander concept, and then concluding appropriately.
EG: The UN General Assembly, as an international forum for the discussion of contemporary issues that threaten world order, acts as an effective mechanism for the promotion of international cooperation. Thus, though not directly an enforceable mechanism, it arguably protects world order more effectively than the UNSC.
See how that sentence (setting up a paragraph on the UN General Assembly) links to a broader picture (international cooperation), and sets up a perspective. THEN, I prove that perspective with evidence. Then, I conclude:
Thus, it is clear how the promotion of discussion in the General Assembly effectively fosters international cooperation and protects world order.
There would be a solid paragraph between that intro and conclusion: And it would be analytical. Which leads me to my next concern; you are recounting more than analysing. Yes, analysis comes into it, and it's effective, but the focus of your response is more on what has happened in these situations, rather than how they demonstrate effectiveness/ineffectiveness in the area of world order. At least, that's how it reads, that is partially because your topic sentences don't set up an analytical viewpoint. They just state what happened, not set up a perspective.
Take out the details of your contemporary situations/issues, they aren't important. More important is things about laws/treaties, and an analysis of their effectiveness. Good or bad? Why is it good/bad? What is your evidence?
Don't get me wrong, you know your shit. I know you know your shit, that is obvious. But you just aren't quite approaching this in the most effective way. Now I'm not saying you need to write the same essay that everyone else is writing; I like that you add some flair. However, these more typical 3-paragraph structures and typical Thesis statements exist because they are effective. Try doing some longer paragraphs and exploring your ideas in more depth; less recounting of historical details, more of your evaluation of effectiveness.
I hope this helps!! Definitely let me know if you need anything clarified ;D
Thank you so much! I definitely tend to infer my judgements so I'll go back and make it more explicit. The shorter paragraphs are something my teacher promoted to show a range of information but I can see where the links are missing. If I were to include topic sentences with a stronger perspective of my analysis and integrate some smaller paragraphs, could I maintain my approach of issue by issue rather than turning to the typical UN structure?
Hey, this is a Family Law essay i wrote quite a while back on Surrogacy and birth technologies. I would really appreciate the feedback. I know i sometimes write more simply than others, but hopefully my work still shows sophistication. Also the idea of posting my essay for eveyone to see terrifies me, since the essays ive skim read so far, sound so good.
But dont let that stop you from being harsh... i promise not to cry too much :P
Hey Mel! Please don't be frightened, I promise that we don't bite ;) seriously, good on you for posting and showing a commitment to improve, you are awesome! ;D
Your essay is attached with comments throughout in bold!
Thanks for the help!
Okay, so to address your concern about "writing style" first. Yes, your style isn't as "sophisticated" as others, but that isn't an issue. Clarity is the most important thing, and you achieved clarity extremely well in your piece. In most places, your ideas were well expressed and well fleshed out, your style did not hinder you at all. There were a few places where I'd tidy up the expression, and you can definitely work on being little more succinct if you want to, but I don't see any major issues with style here! I popped a few comments throughout as to some areas where I'd change the expression a little :)
Your examples are fabulous. Lots of cases (which can be tricky for this Option) and good references to legislation, and lots of media articles to re-enforce your points. That works extremely well. I'd like to see you diversity your response though: The Legal system encompasses laws, courts, and other legal mechanisms; not just legislation. Perhaps investigate discussing the Family Court as a response specifically, for example. I think what you have works well, but you can branch out and get some more to discuss.
Mostly, your examples were linked to your argument well. In a number of places however, I was looking for more evaluation. Sometimes, your information took over your judgements, which are more important. Remember, your marker is a Legal teacher! You can save words by not discussing complex details of laws/cases and just going: "This case where this happened demonstrates the effectiveness of these reforms. Boom bada boom. Very succinct, because the marker doesn't care about small details. THEY WANT YOUR JUDGEMENT!
Your structure is effective, in that you have a main idea that is sustained, but it is lacking proper introductions and conclusions in every paragraph. Further, although your smaller paragraphs do have a common theme threaded, it could be a little clearer. Adding intro/conclusions may help that. I do think it would be worth blending a number of your paragraphs together in a way that works for you, just so your ideas are grouped a little nicer. The small paragraphs don't give you a chance to truly develop an idea for the reader, even if that idea continues through multiple paragraphs. At times I found myself having to go back and read prior paragraphs to orient myself, and that is a BIG no no :)
All that said; you have an essay with mostly clear judgements, lots of evidence to support those judgements, and an argument that is mostly sustained throughout. This is a great essay, the backbone is there! It just needs a bit of cut and polish I think ;) great work Mel!
Hi. Would you please be able to mark and give me some feedback on this World Order essay :)
Discuss How State Sovereignty Can Assist or Impede the Resolution of World Order Issues.
Hey, just wondering if we still need 30 posts for our essay to be marked or is it now 15? Thanks :)
Is there a particular way to write a clear Thesis Paragraph which identifies the topics for the body paragraphs?
I am not sure how to write one for an essay explaining the advantages of compulsory voting compared to voluntary voting
It's back to 15 now! :) PS- To the people above, I'll mark your essays tonight (possibly late-ish), so you'll have them by the morning!! ;D
You might want to give this a read!
Just my draft essay plans for Family that i was wondering if someone could look over
Pretty messy, but hopefully its readable
|
Hey guys, would you mind having a look at this ~pretty rough~ young offenders essay? (needs to be cut down but oh well)
Thank you HSC super heroes ;)
Hi!
was just wondering if i could get a paragraph for a family essay looked at? if i need to make more posts or anything like that please let me know
thanks in advance :) :)
Hey guys,
Would you be able to have a look at my young offenders essay and provide some feedback? I have included some comments/questions in the document. It is currently a bit long. Do you suggest removing some of the LCM or shortening my analysis?
Thanks heaps :)
Hi, would I be able to get some feedback on my crime essay please? It would be greatly appreciated ;D
Hey Angie! Sure thing, check the spoiler below:EssayAssess the effectiveness of achieving justice for young offenders
The legal system effectively reflects societal values through its recognition of the reduced criminal culpability of young offenders. It upholds the international standard of “Conventions on the Rights of the Child 1989” through the age of criminal responsibility, the rights of children when questioned or arrested, the reduced penalties provided to children as well as the focus on rehabilitation through alternative methods to court. However, the effectiveness of the legal system in achieving justice for young offenders is limited by the introduction of the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2016 and the exposure and inhumane treatment of children in detention centres. This introduction feels a little bare bones; just a tad too short. Try giving some justification; why is it vital to treat young offenders fairly? What is the ultimate conclusion you will reach (do the positives outweigh the negatives, or do they remain even?). A clear judgement at the end of your Thesis is vital.
The law effectively achieves justice for young offenders by recognising their diminished criminal responsibility. Nice succinct, introductory sentence. Section 5 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act NSW 1987 entrenches the notion of Doli Incapax which is a conclusive presumption that children under the age of ten are unable to form the requisite mens rea to commit a crime and therefore cannot be held legally responsible for an offence. This legal concept becomes a rebuttable presumption for children aged 10-13 where the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the child could distinguish between right and wrong and understood the consequences of their action. Be careful to avoid 'content vomit,' the marker already knows what this legal principle entails! Focus all your words on analysis. This doctrine prevents the unjust conviction of a “naughty” child, consistent to principles of CROC to which Australia ratified in December 1990. A bit of a less important paragraph, it's all info the marker knows already! Try ditching this and getting straight into your analytical sections.
The effectiveness of Doli Incapax is evident in R v LMW 1999 NSW where a ten-year-old was acquitted of murdering 6 year old Corey Davis due to his impaired intellectual capacity and inability to comprehend the implications of his behaviour. Whilst this protects the child from being exposed to the detrimental criminal system, many people argue that justice was not served to the victims of the offence as suggested in “Doli Incapax: Why children deserve its protection 2003 – Thomas Crofts Professor at Murdoch University School of Law.” Therefore, the law places greater emphasis on the rights and rehabilitation of the child over the values of society. Excellent breakdown of a case; succinct but excellent analysis. I think it would work better blended with the introductory sentence of above! On "many people argue," perhaps say "critics argue" instead?
The legal system effectively protects young offenders through increased rights when questioned or arrested. Swap increased for "additional" perhaps? Under Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act NSW 2002 and Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), children are granted special rights such as having the support of a responsible adult during interrogation and the access to legal aid for all young offenders. This effectively recognises the vulnerability of children, ensuring that a fair trial is achieved. Your analytical style is incredible. HERE is the legislation, HERES what it does, HERES why it is effective. So efficient, excellent stuff. However, the introduction of the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2016 allows for children as young as 14 to be detained for over fourteen days without charge as a response to Farhad Jabar’s murder of Curtis Cheng in 2015. Whilst this provides greater protection and safety to society, it violates Australia’s commitment to CROC and ineffectively treats young offenders like adults. Thus, the increased protection for young offenders is hindered through the introduction of the terrorism act. See the inconsistency between your intro and conclusion? Make sure you stay on track! If you say effectiveness, don't bring in ineffectiveness.
The criminal justice system is effective in providing just penalties to young offenders, focussing on rehabilitation and avoiding imprisonment as outlined in R v GDP 1991. According to the report A picture of NSW Children 2011, detention was the penalty for 1% of cases highlighting the success of the courts in minimising children’s exposure to criminality through incarceration. Nice, more abstract piece of evidence! However, the difficulty with providing a just sentence that also reflects the community’s values is elucidated in “Balancing punishment and Rehabilitation” (SMH 2013) which highlights the need “to maximise the young offender’s prospects of rehabilitation” as well as ensure “denunciation, community protection and specific deterrence”. Ensure all paragraphs are properly concluded.
This emphasis on rehabilitation is not applied universally, demonstrating the law’s attempt to achieve the best result for individual circumstances. In R v Milat 2014, the 17 year old was sentenced to 43 years jail for murdering his friend. This “grave adult behaviour” shifted the focus of his punishment from rehabilitation to retribution and incapacitation, indicating that the law is still effective in providing just outcomes and protecting society. Conversely, many argue that imposing a severe penalty on young offenders is a gross violation of the legal system’s role in protecting children as suggested in the article “Locked up for life. Bronson Blessington was just 14 when he committed one of Australia’s most shocking crimes. But is it right to put a child behind bars indefinitely?” (SMH 2016). I like the shade of grey you are applying here; it works because your introduction allows it to work! This depicts the narrow margin between the best interests of the child and the safety of the community. What do you mean by 'narrow margin? Like a delicate balance perhaps? Analysis is good just a little unclear! Thus, whilst the legal system has effectively encouraged rehabilitation in the sentencing of most cases dealing with young offenders, it diminishes this right on serious offenders in order to protect society. Some excellent arguments are being made in this essay; sorry for the lack of comments, but I don't have much to say!
The utilisation of bail attempts to minimise the accused’s exposure to criminal activity. Specifically for children? Just a tad vague. This is evident in the article “Boy 12, charged with rape of a girl, 6” (SMH Sep 2016) where the boy was granted bail and was permitted to go on holidays with his family. This upholds the presumption of “innocence until proven guilty” and reduces the detrimental impact of the trial on the boy though many may argue that justice is not achieved for the victim. Contrastingly, two 16 year old boys were denied bail as revealed in the article “Terrorism accused drew comparisons to Curtis Cheng murder” (ABC Oct 2016) where the threat to society overrides the best interests of the child. The 2007 amendment to the Bail Act 1978 (NSW) resulted in a 32% rise in juveniles on remand where only 16% of those on remand were given a custodial sentence, revealing the ineffectiveness of the legal system in protecting young offenders from exposure to the criminal justice system. Might be worth attributing that statistic to BOCSAR (or wherever it came from). Therefore, the issue of bail varies in effectiveness in achieving justice for different circumstances.
The welfare model’s focus on rehabilitation is reiterated through alternative methods to court. And how does this relate to justice for young offenders? The Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW) aims to encourage reintegration, reduce recidivism and protect young offenders through the establishment of Youth Justice Conferences which reduced court hearings by nearly half according to BOCSAR. This effective non-custodial method of allowing the offender to confront the consequences of their actions has been criticised however. Don Weatherburn from BOCSAR claimed that the “conference regime is currently no more effective than the children’s court in reducing juvenile reoffending as 58% offend in the five years after a youth justice conference (BOCSAR 2006). Thus, the effectiveness of the legal system’s attempt to avoid court proceedings is inhibited by the practicality of the conferences. This seems a little backwards; you are saying that the courts are ineffective because the conferences are effective? Not quite clicking for me right now.
The failure of the legal system in protecting young offenders is revealed in the Four Corners Report “Australia’s Shame” (2016). Reinforced by the article “youth justice system is a slippery slope of failure” (SMH 2016), the inhumane treatment of juvenile prisoners is exposed, breaching Australia’s obligation under CROC. Furthermore, with 70% of children reoffending (A picture of NSW children 2011), the inadequacy of the current criminal justice system in rehabilitating and reducing recidivism among young offenders is illuminated. Evidently, justice is not achieved for young offenders.
The legal system attempts to protect the vulnerability and reduced liability of young offenders through the notion of the age of criminal responsibility, the increased rights of children and the focus on rehabilitative penalties. However, this effectiveness is impeded by the need to protect the wider community, the toxic culture in treating offenders as well as the unsuccessful attempt at reducing recidivism. Excellent, succinct summary of both sides. Ultimately, the use of social preventative measures alongside intensive long term, well supported rehabilitation programs is essential in achieving just outcomes for young offenders and increase their future prospects as contributors to the community. What's your final judgement? You need to make an evaluative call as to overall effectiveness/ineffectiveness (it can be a shade of grey).
This is a fabulous essay Angie! Super strong analytical style that frequently links effectively back to the main argument. Lots of evidence, and the way you present it is extremely effective. Very succinct, very powerful, very well done!
That said, you've got a huge amount of words here. A crime essay of 1200 is a push!!
I think a play on structure could be a good choice. Instead of a lot of small chunks, try blending! One paragraph on courts/sentencing/YJC's maybe? Then another on legislation? You decide what works for you, but grouping everything together would eliminate the need for so many introductory and concluding sentences. You'd easily cut hundreds of words, and it would make your analysis seem less stop-start! This isn't a huge deal, so if you can pump out this many words in the time limit, then go for it!
My biggest recommendation on the essay itself would be making judgements very explicit. Intros and conclusions need a final statement of assessment; good? Bad? Ugly? Meh? Make your judgement clear! Ensure your judgements are also clear throughout the response too; though you are doing a great job of this already. Just the intro/conclusion stood out to me as needing that big evaluative push.
Oh, and watch for content vomit! That first paragraph didn't offer any analysis; you could probably ditch it ;)
Great work Angie! I'd feel super confident for Legal on Wednesday, this essay is awesome! ;D
- Watch for content vomiting; Remember that your marker is an expert! They don't need to be told much about the laws and reforms, only what you deem necessary for your analysis. At times you spent too long on just facts, not analysis.
- Be sure to make frequent links to effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Imply nothing; always make your judgements strong!
- In that third paragraph, be sure to match your introduction to what you say. You go negative but then discuss positives, and further don't overly focus on what you say you will. Be careful!
- There are a few places where I'd like a TINY BIT more evidence; more cases, a statistic/report, and definitely some media articles. Use our Notes section for some last minute resources (the from the lecture I delivered earlier this month might have some cool nuggets you can use!)!
Overall, smashed it Laura! Definitely high range response, some cut and polish is all it needs :) great work!
Thanks so much Jamon!! You have given me a boost of confidence for tomorrow. 8)
With the judgements in the intro/conclusion and the beginning/end of paragraphs, do you suggest having a definite side e.g.. Thus the law has been effective in achieving justice. Or could i simply say eg. Thus the law has been effective to a varying extent. Do you have any other suggestions on how I could phrase the judgement?
Thanks for the feedback Jamie. The thing I find difficult is, how do I make my essays long enough with pure analysis? I have to add the content to beef them up!
How would you personally respond to this question - "to what extent have legal and non-legal measures responded to the evolving nature of world order"?
And thanks for your help :)
Hey Nicki! No worries at all, your paragraph is below with comments throughout!SpoilerEvaluate the effectiveness of the law in achieving justice for parties involved in relationship breakdowns
The legal system in regards to dealing with relationship breakdowns demonstrates varying levels of justice being achieved depending on the party one belongs to, thus, showing somewhat effectiveness by the law. Watch expression in the topic sentence especially; make sure you are as clear as possible. Who specifically do you think suffers in this area; victims? The offender? Make this clear immediate. The law aims to strongly replicate the risen societal value enshrined in the UN convention of the rights of the child 1989 that places necessity on ensuring the ''best interests of the child'' is paramount through enforcing the family law act 1975 (cth). Link this idea to what you've just discussed; achieving justice for all parties in relationship breakdowns. Are the children the ones who may be neglected? this includes enduring the childs best interests are met in significant situations such as when amidst the divorce and separation of married or de-facto couples. a momentous reform by the family law system was the family law amendment (shared parental responsibility) act 2006 (cth) that established the notion that both parents have shared responsibility for the child regardless of where the parents or childs lives unless maintaining a meaningful relationship with either parent positions the child to be at risk of harm. Again, watch expression, ensure that your ideas come across as clear and succinct. this reflects the societal values that children should be able to interact with parents regularly and also recognises a parents moral right to spend adequate and quality time with their children. But how is it effective/ineffective for the rights of children? Make specific evaluations. this specifically recognising the lack of time a majority of fathers get to be with their children after separation or divorce as indicated in the australian institute of family studies report where ''only 20% of children spent an adequate amount of time with their father’'. Awesome statistic! Some really great evidence in this paragraph. the meaningful and fulfilling relationship one can form with their father is thus lost which is for a majority of children not in their best interests. however, a lack of clarity and emphasis of the 2006 reforms in protecting children and their safety demonstrates how effectiveness of the law in achieving justice for all parties is only to a limited extent as the law encourages a ‘closely connected’ family however unintentionally exposes children and the other parent to the significant concern of family and domestic violence. Very, very good point. Excellent transition. the 2006 reforms created an implication that both parents had the right to equal 50/50 time with their children, displayed as being able to create a harmful environment in the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘’parents with safety concerns are just as likely to have shared care as parents risk free, showing our system’s failure to distinguish between families for who shared care is appropriate and whom it isn’t’’ (2010). Excellent media article inclusion! this is indicative of family law reform not protecting the rights to freedom from violence that can occur within abusive relationships which can affect all parties within the family relationship. thus, justice is only achieved in certain situations where there are less concerns over parents who have a violent history as the law lacks responsiveness to protecting the needs and interests of children as well as ex-partners as there is a 64% chance of women experiencing violence (oscar, 2007). parties involved in relationship breakdowns experience minimal justice due to lacking effectiveness of legal responses.
You've got some really great arguments in here Nicki; and excellent inclusion of evidence! You've got a nice set of laws, reports and media articles that you are using to back up your argument!
My comments throughout should cover my recommendations; mostly on clarity. Remember basic syntax and grammar; it ensures your arguments are as clear as possible. At times the sentences flowed too long and this subtracts from the effectiveness of your writing. Not a huge deal, but something to consider. Ensure that you are consistently evaluating, consistently linking back to your main idea, because your evaluations are really effective but at times seem just a tad off the point. Just some simple phrasing additions, "thus demonstrating a failure of justice for children", that sort of thing, will be enough :)
At it's core, this is a great paragraph! Great work Nicki :)
Hi, would I be able to get some feedback on my crime essay please? It would be greatly appreciated ;D
Hey! Absolutely, your essay is attached below with comments in bold!Spoiler‘To what extent do laws reflect the moral and ethical standards of the community?’
Australian laws intend to reflect and enforce the ethical and moral standards of society, so that all individuals are free from harm, injustice and unfairness. Great justification for the topic, nice work. The extent to which law reflects these standards depends entirely on its ability to achieve justice and meet the needs the accused, victim and the community. Ahh, clever tie in, I like it! The moral and ethical standards of society are constantly changing, thus law must reflect these evolving standards. Law varies to an extent which is evident in the issues of sentencing in regards to ‘one punch’ laws, the new bail act and provocation. Bit of an expression issue in that last sentence; but this is great! I'd like to see a final judgement as your last sentence; a "Yes, this is the argument I'm making." Is the law effective, ineffective or in between?
In recent years, the influences of alcohol and drugs has resulted in individuals harming others and committing crimes due to the effects of these substances. The law must be able give fair sentences for individuals who commit crimes under the influence of alcohol and drugs that reflect ethical and moral standards. Fantastic introduction. However, the community outrage at the case of R v Loveridge (2013) where an intoxicated man named Kieran Loveridge committed three assaults and ‘king’ hit an 18 year old named Thomas Kelly resulting in his death, and was only sentenced to a minimum of five years and two months imprisonment, demonstrates that the law did not achieve justice for the victim or reflect moral and ethical values of the community. You can cut a bit of that case detail; it's not too bad, but the marker doesn't need much detail, try and do it in a single phrase. The article ‘Family of Thomas Kelly grateful for law reform’ (SMH 2014) stated that Kelly’s family created an online petition that demanded law reform gained 142,000 signatures, this indicates that the community disagreed with the law in dealing with Loveridge’s sentence. Nice media tie in. As a result from the pressure of the community and the Director of Public Prosecutions’ appeal, Loveridge’s sentence was increased to a minimum of 10 years and two months imprisonment. The NSW government also introduced changes to the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Assault and Intoxication) Act 2014, which implemented an eight year mandatory sentence for one punch assaults if alcohol or drugs are involved and an increase to the maximum penalty for crimes where drugs and/or alcohol are aggravating factors instead of mitigating factors. This case demonstrates that the law may not meet the moral and ethical standards of community, however, the introduction of legislation indicates the effective implementation of law reform to reflect these standards. Excellently argued, great stuff, my only comments here would be on expression and being succinct! There were areas where you could have been a little more concise, but on the whole, fabulous ;D
An area of of law that has failed to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society is the implementation of the new Bail Act 2013. The Bail Act 2013 replaced the Bail Act 1978 and it uses an unacceptable risk test in regard to whether the accused will fail to appear in any proceedings for the offence, commit a serious offence, endanger the safety of victims, individuals or the community, or interfere with witnesses or evidence. However, this new legislation failed in meeting the moral and ethical standards of the community in the case of R v Hawi (2014). Which moral/ethical standards specifically? Be careful not to be too broad here. The community was outraged at the fact that head bikie gang member Mahmoud Hawi, who was charged with the murder of Anthony Zervas during a 2009 Sydney Airport bikie gang brawl, was granted bail because of the new bail act that was only implemented around one month ago at the time of the case. A bit of a case detail recount; avoid this! One of the purposes of the Bail Act 2013 was to further protect the community from offenders. This purpose is undercut in the article Mahmouh Hawi granted bail on airport murder charges under new NSW laws (SMH 2014) where the mother of the victim told the media that she “feels sick and scared” and also said, “ I hope he doesn’t come anywhere near my family or the witness”. This statements clearly indicates that a family member of the victim feels that she is in danger of the offender while he is out on bail, thus defeating the purpose of the Bail Act 2013. Clearly link to the lack of protection for victim rights and the idea of moral ethical standards. This case demonstrates that law reform has failed at meeting the moral and ethical standards of society, as the community disagrees with the Hawi’s acceptance of bail and the victim’s family does not feel protected from the offender. Another effective paragraph!
The use of provocation as a partial defense to murder has given rise to debate in society of the extent to which law meets the ethical and moral standards in society. Cool! The community outrage at the case of R v Singh (2012), in which a man successfully used provocation as a partial defense against the murder of his wife, demonstrates that the law did not achieve justice for the victim or reflect moral and ethical values. The NSW government introduced the Crimes Amendment (Provocation) Act 2014 (NSW) as a result of pressure from the community to decrease the success of provocation being used as defense for murder. There was also a parliamentary inquiry in response to this case. Like the law reform in R v Loveridge, this legislation represents law reform can reflect the moral and ethical values of society. Again, be specific in what you mean this.However the article Time to act - provocation must be rejected as an excuse for murder (SMH 2013) , indicates that many people in the community want the NSW government to abolish provocations instead of decreasing its success. A little more sophisticated expression would be good here, try; "indicates the communal support for the NSW government to _______." Whereas the article Losing provocation defence could harm abused women (SMH 2012) states that “women who kill their abusive husbands will be disadvantaged and are more likely to be jailed for murder if the defence of provocation is abolished.” Therefore this case demonstrates that law can have difficulties in meeting moral and ethical standards.
In conclusion, it is evident that the law has trouble on reflecting and meeting the moral and ethical standards of society as these standards are constantly evolving over time. Excellent. Certain cases has given rise to law reform in order to meet these standards, however new laws and legislation will not always meet changing moral and ethical standards as demonstrated in R v Singh. Try not to pick on specific cases you've used; give general overviews. Overall the law at some extent does meet the moral and ethical standards of society, but it still has difficulties in achieving justice and fairness for individuals, victims and offenders. Excellent conclusion.
This is an excellent essay cjrig! Fantastic arguments, excellent evidence, well structured, it's really great stuff! Most of my comments throughout are nitpicks; on the whole this is excellent stuff! Watch for wasting words on unnecessary case details (it will save you time in the exam I hope), and be sure that if you use the balancing rights of victim/offender/society idea in the intro, that it is carried fully through the response. You didn't mention it heaps after your Thesis and 1st paragraph; it falls away just a tad and becomes only an implied thing (in my opinion). Be explicit ;D
You should be super confident though; this is a great response and I'm sure you'll smash your exam tomorrow! ;D
Hi Jamon, Could you have a look at this and give me any feedback you can. The Essay and notification of task is attached to give you a guidline of what is been looked for :)
Its due tommorow so any help is much appreciated
Thanks
Would you be able to critique my legal essay? Any feedback is welcome as I am aiming to improve my writing skills.
Thank you
:)
Hey Neila! Sorry for the delay - The lectures and the subsequent exhaustion had us stop marking for a weekend ;) back on it now! Expect feedback really soon! :)
Hey!! I attended a few lectures with ATARnotes this past week and only just found out about these forums! in particular, elyse showed me this thread and I'm very interested in using it more often :)
I was set a homework task to write an essay on "Assess the extent to which the categories of crime reflect moral and ethical standards". Our teacher gave us all the relevant information needed for a few of the paragraphs... but we were required to write the intro, 1st body paragraph and conclusion from scratch.
Was just wondering if you could read through to see if it made sense and if I was answering the question effectively?
Hey I have this essay I have to to do on this question due monday:
Assess the extent to which factors affecting sentencing decisions balance the rights of the victims, offenders, and society
I have spent so long changing it and editing it but I still feel like its not that great! I also have to include the Rogerson Mnamara case as my main one but I can use other ones to support it
The notification is attached
Was wondering if you could take a read and tell me if I am answering the question effectively and if my points make sense?
Also it would be really hard for me to add stuff in because I am on the word limit but I can change things
Hey parthie! We definitely can take a look at this :) I'm keen to know what you think of the Rogerson and McNamara cases? Do you find them useful as a legal student?
The comments are in bold in the spoiler below :)SpoilerThere are many factors that affect sentencing decisions and each of these factors try It's super minor - but "try" personifies the factors. "The intention of each factor is to balance...'' to balance the rights of victims, offenders and society. These factors include aggravating factors which make the offence more serious and mitigating factors which work in favour of explaining the reason and circumstances surrounding the defendant’s actions. Some of these factors were present in the sentencing decisions of RvRogerson RvMcnamara (2016) cases. This last sentence doesn't add anything to your argument except name a case - I'd cut this out to make room for your evaluation. Introduce your cases in the next paragraph. You haven't actually made your judgement about how successful these factors are, which is what the question is asking you. The very first thing you should be focusing on is making a judgement, and right now we don't have that. You could say that you think each party is eloquently treated in sentencing, or you could say victim's rights are least eloquently addressed, or you could say that each case holds a different level of justice for each party. Whatever your judgement is, make it! It's probably safest to go with a "the rights of the victim, society, and offender are balanced by different factors in the sentencing decision, but often the respect for rights of one party will compromise another's." Something like this opens you up to discussion, but that's just me adding my own twist to it. You could just say each case is unique, but generally the law adequately balances rights. Whatever you truly believe is worth arguing, make that statement early.
Aggravating factors help balance the rights of the victim as they could lead to an increased sentence. Rogerson and McNamara were both given life sentences because oftheseaggravating factors; the disposal of the victim’s body at sea which was called both “cruel” and “insensitive” and was done so the victim would never be found. Who called it cruel and insensitive? Quote this to give it authority. I would also identify what an aggravating factor is and when it is considered and by whom. This shouldn't be more than a sentence, but simply identify that you understand the place in the process where aggravating factors are considered. A further aggravating factor was the offenders intention to sell 2.78kg of the illegal drug ice and the men killed the victim for the purpose of financial gain which was stated to be “no different than contract killing” by the NSW crown prosecutor. Another aggravating factor was the use of the weapon to kill the victim and the fact that the crime was committed in company. Neither man had shown any remorse over the crime they committed and as the verdicts were handed out. Until this point: there is no analysis. All we have is examples of aggravating factors in the case, rather than linking to the argument. So I would cut down this middle bit by listing some of the aggravating factors in one sentence, and then evaluate exactly how this supports society and the victim (usually these go together) and then talk about how this balances the rights of the offenders in a separate sentence so that you can compare and contrast, thus supporting your argument. Aggravating factors generally heavily influence sentencing decisions as they help balance the rights of the victims by bringing awareness to their experiences through the understanding of the circumstances and details surrounding the crime
A person’s prior convictions can be an aggravating factor, and generally increase the length of a their sentence whereas being a first time offender with no criminal record is seen may be seen as...it isn't always. The worst murder case in history won't be mitigated because it is a first time offence. as a mitigating factor and can entail a lesser sentence. Rogerson’s prior convictions included perverting the course of justice and lying to the 1999 Police Integrity Commission which entailed prison time as well as being dismissed from the police force, he allegedly was involved with a drug dealer in the past. Was this cited in court? If you can obtain the court documents and quote this, I would! Rogerson shot and killed heroin dealer Warren Lanfranchi and when his girlfriend (Sallie-Anne Huckstepp) and Lynn Woodward gave evidence against Rogerson they were found dead, and missing respectively. He was also charged with conspiring to bribe and kill fellow police officer Michael Drury however he was later acquitted. Prior convictions, can be seen as impeding on the offender’s rights as the judge may gave the offender a harsher sentence based on their past and on their previous “bad character” rather than just the crime in question. Again, the evaluation is missing. No doubt you know the cases well, but we haven't actually specifically looked at victim, offender, society. Do mitigating factors support the victim? Not really. Do they support society? Mm, potentially less time the tax payer is paying for someone to be in jail. Do they support the offender? Yes, because it takes into account each individual circumstance. We need to keep bringing it back to this evaluation!
A major aggravating factor is whether or not a crime is premeditated as planned crimes have longer sentences . The offenders in the case were both former police officers who abused their knowledge of the law and planned the murder in advance using their experience and training. McNamara had taken his boat out on the day before the murder and Rogerson visited the shed to remove some office chairs. McNamara had met with the victim 27 times before the murder, gained his trust and claimed that the meetings were for a book about asian crime gangs he was writing however there was no evidence presented to support this. McNamara also bought an untraceable white station wagon before the crime which was used to transport the victim’s body. This is 127 words with no judgement or argument. You're identifying another type of aggravating factor but not actually linking it to an argument. Justice Bellow stated the crime was “extensive in its planning, brutal in its execution and callous in its aftermath” and the victim was “executed in cold blood, just as the offenders had planned.” The consideration of this factor helped balance the rights of the victim and society as it was clear in achieving justice, protecting society from experiencing further crimes and understanding what happened to the victim This is a nice little piece of analysis! If you can embed this kind of reflection on the facts several times in a paragraph, twice minimum, you're making great progress.
Another factor that affects sentencing decision is whether or not the accused pleaded guilty. Both Mcnamara and Rogerson pleaded not guilty, each presenting their own version of what happened, pointing the blame to each other. The judge however rejected both of their accounts and despite the fact that he couldn't find beyond reasonable doubt who had pulled the trigger as a result he sentenced both men to life imprisonment. If the offender pleads guilty their sentence will often be shorter than if they pleaded not guilty and were found guilty as they are assisting the authorities, this helps balance the rights of the offenders as they are given a choice and the decision they make is taken into consideration. This also helps balance the rights of society and the victim as if a person is found guilty when they pleaded not guilty, through receiving a longer sentence justice and protection are provided for both society and the victim.
Victim impact statements (VIS) can be taken into consideration in sentencing decisions, it is written by the victim or the victim’s family about the impact the crime has had on them, heard at the time of sentencing. Jamie Gao’s family stated “the courts can’t lessen the term of Jamie’s death or the impact that his death, the investigation and ensuing trial has had on our family,” however they thanked the police, the DPP and the judge for sentencing both men to life imprisonment. VIS have thoroughly helped victims in achieving their rights in being able to express the consequences of the offender’s action. This is a great spot for discussion: When are VISs not useful in balancing the rights? Look at some domestic violence cases like R V Osland where the VIS was delivered poorly due to trauma.
Although there are no mitigating factors taken into consideration when sentencing McNamara and Rogerson, some of these could include: the offender being youthful or inexperienced, showing remorse, being provoked or acting under duress and good character. These factors are essential in helping offenders achieve their rights. However mitigating factors can also impede on the rights of victims as portrayed in the R v. Gus Forbes (1980) case. An aboriginal man was found guilty and sentenced to 12 years imprisonment for murder and 8 years for rape, however the judge took Aboriginal customary law into consideration and the fact that rape is not as seriously regarded in Aboriginal communities. Consequently, the judge gave a more lenient sentence which isn't in the interest of the victim and society's rights for fairness and justice. As stated by the Australian Law Reform Commission’s report Recognition of Aboriginal Customary Laws “It can be argued that a special sentencing discretion of this kind would be discriminatory or divisive, since it would allow some Aboriginal defendants the possibility of mitigating their sentence in a way not available to other persons.
RvRogerson, RvMcNamara (2016) balanced the rights of victims and society through consideration of aggravating factors and subsequent life sentence, however the rights of the offender weren't always upheld due to Rogerson’s prior convictions. Factors affecting sentencing decisions whether mitigating or aggravating attempt to balance the rights of victims, society and offenders, however they are not always successful.
The first step to improving your response is to make a judgement at the beginning, and keep supporting the judgement with facts throughout. I think a reshuffle of your paragraphs could be useful. Your first three body paragraphs could be condensed by about half, and put into just two paragraphs. So much of the paragraph is describing the factors of sentencing, rather than being evaluative. Perhaps one sentence should be describing, and the next four should be evaluating. Currently it's in reverse. Remember to address the victim, society, and the offender in each reflection on the system. The VIS area is very interesting and can definitely be opened up for a rich discussion! Do VIS balance the rights of a victim when the victim is dead and there's no family to deliver it on their behalf? What does society lose when a poor sentencing judgement is made?
When you thread your judgement clearly through each paragraph, you'll see a cohesiveness come over your essay. I think you're being caught up in using the case your teacher assigned, and it's leading you to describe the case rather than make evaluations on the sentencing process and then use the case as support. Perhaps I'm suggesting you should switch the prominence of the case for analysis! That way your essay will be very strong.
Let me know if you need more help before this is due! :)
Thanks so much Elyse!!! This has helped me so much!! I just have a few questions
Are you saying that I should integrate my evaluation into my evidence rather than having evidence than evaluation in a paragraph??
For VIS could you say that they are compromising the rights of offenders through the fact they they are "construed as promoting harsher punishments against defendants who murder people who have a family member willing to make a statement, as opposed to victims that do not."
I'll tag in for Elyse; being in Venice it's like 5am(?) for her, want to make sure you get your question answered before your task is due tomorrow! She might tag in too ;D
I think that is exactly what Elyse is suggesting - And it is the best way to go. Every time you introduce a piece of evidence, you should be analysing/evaluating it. In your response, you had a lot of sentences that were just describing aspects of the case, rather than saying how they recognised rights of victims/offenders/society, or how effectively these rights were balanced :)
You could definitely say that! The VIS will always primarily protect the rights of the victim, but in terms of linking it to the rights of the offender, I think that works well! Remember to give the source of that quote to give yourself a bit of authority (quotes from reputable sources/authority figures are cool) ;D
Thankyou so much!!!
One last question (sorry) I am a little confused as why remorse is seen as a mitigating factor and how this helps the offender??
Thanks again
Sure! So remorse is an interesting one, but look at it this way.
Say you had two people of the same age and background in front of you who had both committed the same murder (as much as that is possible). Person A expresses great remorse, is visibly upset by what has transpired, and expresses a desire to change and rehabilitate. Person B expresses no remorse and is happy they committed the crime. Who gets the harsher punishment?
Arguably, Person B gets a harsher punishment. They have far lower chance of rehabilitation and high chance of re-offending; their punishment is more severe.
Essentially, expression of remorse is a symbol of the offenders desire to rehabilitate and become a functioning, law abiding member of society. Accepting remorse from the offender is accepting their rights to rehabilitative sentencing enshrined in human rights documentation :) :) :)
Thanks so much for all your help!! Don't know what I wouldve done without it!!!!! :)
Hey! Sorry once again for the delay in getting you some feedback; so glad you enjoyed the lectures and hope these forums come to be really useful throughout the year! ;D
Your feedback is attached below in the spoiler - My comments are in bold :)SpoilerAssess the extent to which the categories of crime reflect moral and ethical standards
The categories of crime are largely effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of the community but somewhat lack effectiveness in representing these standards for certain drug offences. This is an awesome sentence - But it feels a little sporadic. It's not been 'set up' properly. I'd like to see you start with something like "The categories of crime are essential in _______." Give a bit of context! Moral and ethical standards are demonstrated in the categories of crime through the formation and enforcement of the Crimes Act 1900 legislation, comprising of the categories of crime to protect the community. Good. However, there has been great debate and rhetoric in the effectiveness of convicting drug offences to protect the greater society at large as the laws fundamental aim. A little unclear in that sentence, I think expression could be improved. The debate addresses whether drug offences are merely a self-imposed act to only harm the individual and not the greater community at large. In this way, the categories of crime mostly reflect moral and ethical standards but may lack the accurate representation of these standards on the category of drug offences. Good introduction! Sets up the argument and lays out your plan of attack - Nice! Work on clarifying expression and adding a bit of context to the start.
Offences against the person involve some form of harm inflicted on an individual, consequently making it a significant offence under the categories of crime to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society. Normally I would say to steer clear of facts - We know what an offence against the person is and so normally it would be unnecessary to mention. However, this is a weird question and I think it works well here. This is demonstrated through inclusion of such offences in the Crimes Act (1900) ,which comprises of the categories of crime to protect individuals and the greater community. You stated this in the intro - Feels a little bit throwaway here. Society’s unacceptance of the unlawful killing of a person sees murder as the most serious offence, often resulting in convicted offenders receiving heavy punishments and substantial jail-time. 'Unacceptance' isn't a word - Maybe 'condemnation', perhaps? This is evident in the case of R v Milat (1996) where the accused was sentenced to penal servitude for life. A more recent case study could be beneficial; even as an addition not a replacement! Additionally, Homicide is categorised under 5 offences that are all recognised in the Crimes Act 1900 to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as it protects the community at large. How do the differing categories assist with this though? How is it more effective than a simpler, broader punishment. This highlights the categories of crime as a pure reflection of moral and ethical standards. Additionally assault and sex offences, such as sexual assault, are regarded by society as crimes that can inflict physical and psychological harm to a person in an unlawful way. This is demonstrated in the case of R v Scaf (2002), where one of the accused, Bilal Scaf, was sentenced to 31 years imprisonment. Scaf was moved to maximum security in Goulburn Goal after prison officers uncovered plans by his fellow inmates, at the Long Bay Correction Centre, to inject him with HIV-infected blood. How is this additional information relevant to your argument? Whenever you give an example, you MUST link it to the argument you are making. As a result, the inclusion of sexual assault and its various relevant categories, exemplify the categories of crime as a reflection of moral and ethical standards, even amongst inmates. In this way, the categories of crime evidently reflect moral and ethical standards to protect both the individual and the community. Solid paragraph - Ensure that all your examples are relevant and that you are really exploring your argument thoroughly.
While many of the offences against the person reflect contemporary moral and ethical standards, it could be argued that the same is not true for certain drug offences. Fabulous opener. Currently, some drugs that cause harm are illegal, such as heroin and cannabis, while others, such as alcohol and tobacco, are not illegal. The National Drug Strategy Household Survey (2013) (NDSHS) found that 40% of Australians consider the excessive use of alcohol to be the “drug issue that people feel is of the most concern to the general community”. In addition, 26% of Australians over the age of 14 had been a victim of an alcohol-related incident and around 8% had experienced physical abuse from an alcohol-affected person. Nice inclusion of statistics - How does this relate to your argument though? However, the same survey found that “the most supported policy to reduce alcohol harm was to establish more severe penalties for drink driving (85%) followed by stricter enforcement of the law against supplying to minors (84%)”. This would suggest that although alcohol is perceived to be of the most concern, society’s values and ethics accept alcohol as a legitimate drug that requires regulation, rather than criminalisation. This seemed a bit more like a regurgitation of statistics than an actual argument, if that makes sense? So you've given some great data, but not really done a lot to link that to the idea of moral/ethical standards (it disappears after the first sentence).
The NDSHS also noted that tobacco is the major cause of cancer in Australia, accounting for about 20-30% of cancer cases. However, as tobacco usage has declined significantly between 2010 and 2013 (from 15% to 12% of people aged 14 and older), people are less inclined to perceive it as a drug of most concern to the general community. The survey also found that society supports policies aimed at reducing harm and preventing supply to minors, with around 90% of people supporting such causes. Additionally, while the harm caused by tobacco is great, there is no evidence to suggest the public would support tobacco’s criminalisation. This would suggest that society’s values and ethics are represented in current drug offences, to the extent they do not criminalise alcohol and tobacco. So I love the point you are making here - That the non-criminalisation of these drugs reflects the current sociopolitical standards. Fabulous! But it feels again like this is more statistics than argument - I reckon you could blend this with the previous paragraph.
Additionally, the criminalisation of drugs such as cannabis fail to deter individuals due to the ambiguity of the law and its disregard by society. The idea of moral/ethical standards should appear in your first sentence - This shows your argument continues to be at the front of your mind! In 2013, a study by the NDSHS found that around 42% of people in Australia aged 14 years or older had illicitly used drugs with almost 3 million of these people using these drugs in the last 12 months. These statistics suggest that the uses of illicit drugs are mostly common within the broader society. Link to your argument. Another finding was the statistics in regards to victims involved in drug-related incidents. A huge 8.3% of the population had been in a drug-related incident, with verbal abuse being the most frequently reported incident reported overall. Within this number 3.1% had experienced some form of physical abuse under the influence of illicit drugs. These proportions are significantly less than the equivalent for alcohol. In addition, a 2012 article from ‘The Conversation’ by Alison Ritter, Professor & Specialist in Drug Policy at UNSW Australia, highlighted the public’s opinion on the support of the decriminalising of cannabis. Nice inclusion of media - I love it! But again, link to argument. The recent national survey found that 80% of Australians support the decriminalisation of cannabis. The enormous figure demonstrates the notion that, despite the harm caused by drugs; it is not a factor that causes harm as great as tobacco and alcohol. The report also suggested that a large proportion of the population has consumed such substances and an overwhelming number support the criminalisation of some illicit drugs. In this way, it can be argued that the category of drug offences, primarily in relation to cannabis, is not a reflection of a number of Australians morals and ethics. Once again, some great information and ideas coming through here but it's not quite being linked to the greater Thesis effectively. It is hinted, and if I do some thinking I can make the connections. But I shouldn't have to do that work; it should be clear as day!
The categories of crime are mostly a reflection of the Australian society’s morals and ethical values but arguably lack the appropriate representation of a large number of Australians views towards drug offences primarily involving cannabis. Excellent start to your conclusion. Offences against the person is a category of crime that reflects the moral and ethical standards of society at large demonstrated through inclusion of such offences in the Crimes Act 1900 legislation. However with certain drug offences it is certain that this is not the case. Great - You are making a very obvious and clear judgement here. Society’s values and ethics are represented in current drug offences; to the extent they do not criminalise alcohol and tobacco. This extends to the notion that whilst alcohol is perceived to be of the most concern, society’s values and ethics accept alcohol and tobacco as drugs that require regulation rather than criminalisation. A little too much restatement here - Your conclusion should VERY briefly summarise your arguments. Right now its a tad long. However, the criminalisation of drugs such as cannabis fail to deter individuals due to the ambiguity of the law and its disregard by society. The recent national survey found that 80% of Australians support the decriminalisation of cannabis creating the argument that certain categories of drug offences, primarily in relation to cannabis, fail to reflect a number of Australians values and ethics. Never introduce any new/old statistics in your conclusion. All your ideas/evidence should be done by now - A conclusion is just summation! In this way, the categories of crime mostly accomplish an accurate representation of the moral and ethical standards of society but lack this accuracy in relation to drug offences. This issue requires rectification through law reform to reflect the current societies moral and ethical standards in order to balance the rights of the individual and the needs of the state. Great finish, nicely done.
Right, so let me prelude by saying: This question suuuucks. It is not nice. Definitely not an essay-worthy question - You can't analyse the categories of crime. That isn't a thing, at least in my opinion. So, take this feedback with that in mind, because I think you are tackling a very difficult question that isn't very easy to access.
One thing you are doing well; fantastic evidence. Cases, stats, laws, media - Some excellent inclusions. You could include more laws and more cases, of course, but this is a great foundation and it shows a commitment to proving your point. That is fabulous! What I want you to do is keep the argument at the front of your mind - How does this piece of evidence make your argument more convincing? How does it relate? Many times you introduced a statistic or a media article but didn't link it to your argument. You must always do this!
Really, this is the main bit of feedback I'd have at this point, in addition to the comments throughout. Getting your argument more obvious and more cohesive. I know what it is, but it could be expressed more clearly and more succinctly. Start every paragraph with a sentence linking to your argument - 'Moral/ethical standards' should always appear in that first sentence. It should appear frequently throughout the paragraph as well. You could also benefit from a more clear definition of your argument in the introduction - Primarily, a clear definition of moral/ethical standards and WHY the categories of crime should reflect them.
My feedback for this essay isn't great, I admit, because its such a weird question! But I hope this helps in a small way and that you'll be back for more feedback in the future! Let me know if you needed anything clarified ;D
Hey guys! So i've been given a legal studies assessment task for Crime weighing 15%! Part A of the task is to gather 5 articles and complete thorough annotations onto the articles. Part B is where we have to incorporate AT LEAST one of these articles in an essay. We have the option of two essay questions to do (1000 words), they are:
1. Discuss how successful situational and social crime prevention strategies are in achieving compliance in regards to criminal law OR
2. Discuss how the factors that affect criminal behaviour impact on achieving compliance in regard to criminal law
The criteria is as follows;
"You will be marked on how well you:
* Analyse and explain the nature of crime
* discuss the effectiveness of the legal system in achieving compliance
* Locate, select, organise and synthesise relevant legal information from a variety of sources
* Communicate in written forms using well-structured and logical arguments"
I was thinking of doing 1 - the on on situational and social crime prevention, looking at how effective they are in enhancing compliance with the law? Let me know which one you guys think would allow me to access the higher bands easily! I'm currently coming #1 in legal studies following last years exams and I REALLY want to maintain this rank especially in this assessment :)
I am on finishing this assignment by Sunday arvo so I can submit on here for feedback - you were REALLY helpful with my other essay!!
Hey Neila! So glad the feedback you received earlier was helpful - Congrats on your incredible start to the HSC! ;D
So the thing is, the question you choose won't matter. Both will allow you to access the higher bands, so its really whichever you are more comfortable with! Personally, I would chose the second question, because:
a) In structuring the essay in my head, the variety of factors affecting criminal behaviour could make it easier to structure paragraphs. That said, I could pretty easily work around the first one too. More importantly:
b) The first question relates more to the Investigation process, the second question can relate more to sentencing. I personally prefer writing about sentencing over investigation (my HSC question was on investigation... ew)
So its seriously personal preference! You chose the first one initially, so chances are you'll be loads better sticking with that ;D
Thank you so much once again! I think stick with 1) because our school hasn't taught us about sentencing and punishment as yet! we've only done sections 1 and 2 of the crime syllabus (which is slightly odd - but i'm not too sure)!
Thank you so much once again! I think stick with 1) because our school hasn't taught us about sentencing and punishment as yet! we've only done sections 1 and 2 of the crime syllabus (which is slightly odd - but i'm not too sure)!
Has your school done Human Rights or an option first?
No that sounds pretty nicely in line with most people I know, maybe the slightest bit behind but not much! Both of your questions relate to investigation, but that second question (having learned the whole thing) can easily relate to sentencing. If that's not something you've learnt, then definitely not mandatory or worth worrying about. Good luck with the task! ;D
Hey guys! How can you make sure your essay is a 15/15 for crime? I'm really hesitant to approach it.
I'm back; So I looked around on the media forum here and it was REALLY helpful in inspiring me to write up my essay. However I struggled to find cases to go with my essay question online ahh. I have HEAPS of articles all throughout and stats from BOSCAR and the AIC. Is this a bad thing?
Here is my essay - was just wondering if I could get some feedback :) On a side note - the word count was 1000 words (allowing 10% over) but i've written like 1300 so I also need a bit help cutting down (whoops). Worth 15% of my legal studies HSC mark :-[ :-[ :-[
Hey Neilab! Glad to hear the media forums have been proving useful to you - Lots of media references and statistics is great if they are helping you prove your argument! ;D
Happy to give some feedback! You had an essay marked a little while ago, so you'll need another 15 posts to get feedback - 15+15=30 :) I mean you are two posts off that, if you go say hey in the 2017 discussion thread, then post here to let me know when you've done that, that's 30 posts ;D I'll get the feedback done ASAP so hopefully once you've done it I'll already have it marked ;D
I'm back; So I looked around on the media forum here and it was REALLY helpful in inspiring me to write up my essay. However I struggled to find cases to go with my essay question online ahh. I have HEAPS of articles all throughout and stats from BOSCAR and the AIC. Is this a bad thing?
Here is my essay - was just wondering if I could get some feedback :) On a side note - the word count was 1000 words (allowing 10% over) but i've written like 1300 so I also need a bit help cutting down (whoops). Worth 15% of my legal studies HSC mark :-[ :-[ :-[
Hey hey! Your essay is attached with feedback below:SpoilerDiscuss how successful situational and social crime prevention strategies are in achieving compliance in regard to criminal law
Situational and social crime prevention strategies have been mostly successful in achieving compliance with criminal law amongst certain categories of crime. Nice simple and straight to the point; good start. You could first give a justification of WHY crime prevention is a necessity in the criminal justice system (improves efficiency, etc). Situational crime prevention aims to reduce the opportunity for crime through a pragmatic approach by altering opportunistic premise and modifying environmental factors to limit offenders from engaging in criminal behaviour. I wouldn't normally say a definition is necessary - If you are desperate for cutting words it could be worth a look? But this is a hand in task(?) so perhaps a little different. Whilst the NSW government has partnered with communities to implement situational strategies to increase adherence with the law, the justification for widespread CCTV has been questioned with privacy concerns causing debate. Nice set up of the topics of discussion without elaborating, great. Social crime prevention attempts to address the underlying social factors that may lead to criminal behaviour. According to criminologist, Dr. Clancy, the most effective way of preventing local crime and increasing compliance with the law is through early intervention schemes such as youth mentoring and education plans to protect individual rights. I think a direct quote here could work a little better than just paraphrasing, but that's a personal preference. This is further exemplified in the town of Bourke where social crime prevention strategies have been highly effective in increasing compliance with the law. However social crime prevention has been mostly ineffective for offenders of ATSI decent with statistics from the AIC and BOSCAR indicating that recidivism rates are high. Perhaps a little too much into specifics this time - Try not to give any evidence at this point; summarise the topics you'll discuss and move on. Despite this, The December 2016 BOSCAR report indicated a decrease in 16 out of all 17 major offences. In this way, preventative measures have been mostly effective in enhancing compliance with the law despite grey-areas. A great introduction on the whole! I think you could trim words by cutting back on the summaries (too much into evidence) and perhaps cutting the definitions out if you don't need them - A HSC essay under exam conditions would not need them.
Situational crime prevention strategies have been highly effective in creating supportive environments that decrease the risk of crime. Great introduction, sets up an evaluation immediately. They aim to enhance compliance with the law by deterring individuals through the manipulation of environments such as installing CCTV and alarm systems. The ABC News article “Sydney crime falling ad prevention strategies yield results” includes criminologist, Dr. Garner Clancey’s: “Models of Crime Prevention”. The report suggests various situational mechanisms to reduce local crime by increasing compliance with the law such as; installing locks and alarms, improving electronic security, increasing lighting, and making buildings harder to enter. Nice use of media/report there; I'd like to see a statistic as proof that the measures are working! These mechanisms are highly effective as they aim to increase compliance, in a resource efficient way, to protect the society at large. Additionally, the NSW government has announced the additional funding to the “NSW Community Safety Fund” allowing local communities to apply for a $250,000 grant for projects designed specifically to prevent crime in their respective vicinity. Excellent use of a legal response, that ISN'T a case or a law - Many students forget to use these. Great work. This is a highly effective measure displaying resource efficiency and equitable funding as strategies are implemented to correlate with the direct needs of the community. In this way, situational crime prevention strategies have been highly effective in meeting the needs of the greater community by increasing compliance with the law through the deterrence of criminal activity. Not much to say about this paragraph, I think it is near perfect! Perhaps a LITTLE more evaluation in the earlier half, but the media/report you are discussing does admittedly make that a little tough.
Though most situational crime prevention strategies have been effective in increasing compliance with the law, the use of CCTV has been criticized immensely, raising concerns over privacy and resource efficiency. Fabulous. The Sydney Morning Herald article, “Facing up to the law: increasing surveillance raises privacy concerns”, has exposed statistics from a report by police in London, showing that only 1 crime was solved per 1000 cameras. This highlights the ineffectiveness of CCTV as it lacks resource efficiency by showing no indication of preventing the incidence of crime. Excellent use of evidence with immediate evaluation - You've settled into a nice 'point-evaluate' structure here that flows well! Additionally, The president of Australian Councils for Civil Liberties, Terry O’Gorman, stated that it was “troubling that such CCTV technologies have no monitoring on the impacts on privacy.” This raises the issue that the rights of the individual and the community are not being protected, as they are unaware of the uses of these images. Conversely, the 2016 BOSCAR report indicated that stealing from a retail store had an upward trend of 6.4% across NSW; underlining the issue that situational crime prevention is highly ineffective in this area. This may be as a result of self-serve checkouts in supermarkets and inefficient alarm systems that promote non-compliance amongst individuals. Thus, situational crime prevention has been some-what in effective in enhancing compliance with the law. I would say that the last few sentences of this paragraph went off track a little bit; you've started the paragraph saying you'll focus on CCTV, then you stray from that to a more general argument. You need to either start more general or keep the focus on CCTV (CCTV can play a big role either way) :)
Social crime prevention has been extremely effective in addressing the underlying factors that affect criminal behaviour to enhance compliance with the law. To overcome non-compliance with the law, according to former crime prevention consultant and senior lecture at the University of Sydney, Dr. Garner; the most effective way of preventing local crime and increasing compliance with the law is through social crime prevention strategies and early intervention schemes. This includes youth mentoring and education plans that support individuals, primarily the youth, who have an increased chance of falling into crime in later life. These programs aim to target the various factors that affect criminal behaviour by supporting youth in regards to social and psychological determinants. We are already halfway through the paragraph without any real evaluation or analysis - If you are looking for words to trim, the sentences above could be worth. look. This enhances compliance with the law, is extremely resource efficient and protects the rights of the individual and the offender, making it an extremely effective measure. Have any proof of these statements? ABC News article, “Backing Bourke: How a radical new approach is saving young people from a life of crime’, illustrates the effectiveness of social crime prevention in increasing compliance in the town of Bourke. Three years ago, Bourke was ranked the highest in NSW for breaching and non-complying with the law for offences such as bail, assault, domestic violence and more. The tone there when you say "and more" shifts a little from the analytical, academic tone that you want. Be careful not to make this a recount. I'd just write "such as bail, assault, and domestic violence." The introduction of the “Justice Reinvestment” scheme aimed to reorientate services with the focus on a more social approach through the establishment of education programs, free driving programs, and crackdowns on domestic violence. Following this scheme, the number of driving offences has been the lowest in 10 years; kindergarten students are more prepared for schooling, and crime rates have decreased. I would compress all of those points into, "The introduction of the "Justice Reinvestment Scheme" in Bourke NSW, saw significant reductions in crime rates (particularly driving offences), as exemplified in the article ________. This shows the effectiveness of ______." Or something. A lot of unnecessary description; even when presenting a case study, it needs to be analysis focused! Case details are not super important. The strategy demonstrates resource efficiency and high responsiveness as it met the community’s needs, protecting the rights of the youth. In this way, social crime prevention has been extremely effective in increasing compliance with the law with a decrease in crime rates in Bourke. This paragraph can definitely be streamlined, but definitely still effective.
Whilst social crime prevention aims to address the underlying factors of criminal behaviour, it has been highly ineffective in addressing the needs of released inmates following jail, as non-compliance and re-offending rates are extremely high. Nice point to make - Gives rationale to the two points of view you are exploring. According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, 60% of those in custody in Australia have been imprisoned before. Recidivism is influenced by a range of socio-cultural, socio-economic and environmental factors. The Sydney Morning Herald article, “Aboriginal jail rates increase by 50%, but rehab fails to reduce re-offending”, exposes the alarming imprisonment rate amongst Aboriginal Australians that has increased by an alarming 52% over a decade. Indigenous people are missing out on rehab programs because they do not spend enough time in jail to qualify, or cannot access culturally appropriate services. A little tone issue there again - "missing out on rehab programs" is what triggered it. I'm not sure how to fix it, but it has again slipped into a bit more of a conversational tone if that makes sense? This highlights the ineffectiveness of social crime prevention in achieving compliance, as measures do not target the needs to the ATSI community. There are limited social programs available for released prisoners, and those that exist lack accessibility. Additionally, ABC’s Four Corners Program: Australia’s Shame, highlighted the abuse juvenile justice facilities impose against Indigenous young people, to represent the beginning of a cycle of incarceration and re-offending. This strengthens the extreme ineffectiveness of social crime prevention tactics that, in this case, enhance non-compliance with the law. As a result, these measures have been breached the rights Indigenous offenders and failed to increase compliance with the law. Again a little structural issue here - You've focused on indigenous offenders but that didn't get a mention in your intro. Your introduction and conclusion for every paragraph should match up perfectly and discuss the same thing!
Compliance with the law is achieved through a range of situational and social crime prevention strategies with each measure displaying varying levels of effectiveness. Situational crime prevention has been mostly effective in deterring crime and enhancing compliance with the law on a community basis. The NSW Community Safety Fund demonstrates equitable resource efficiency to correlate with the needs of community’s to target areas of assistance. However, CCTV footage lacks effectiveness by showing no indication of reducing crime rates and imposing privacy concerns amongst the greater community. If you are looking to trim words, you definitely don't need to go back into your evidence in this much detail. I'd go one sentence for situational, one sentence for social, to summarise everything. This would be an easy way to bring your word count down, if it feels right to you. This exemplifies a breach of individual rights and a lack of resource efficiency that fails to directly increase compliance with the law. On the other hand, social crime prevention has been highly effective in reducing crime rates, primarily in the town of Bourke. The “Justice Reinvestment” strategy demonstrated resource efficiency and high responsiveness as it met the community’s needs by decreasing crime rates – as a result of the individual’s adherence to the law. However, the SMH article exposed the ineffectiveness of social crime prevention in the area of re-offending. Due to a lack of culturally appropriate services and maltreatment in correctional care, various measures have been breached the rights Indigenous offenders and failed to increase compliance with the law by lacking resource efficiency. Whilst crime prevention has increased compliance with the law amongst most categories of crime, more action needs to be taken to decrease crime rates even more, especially in the area of re-offending. Little tone issue, "even more," not quite academic. This may be enhanced through situational and social crime prevention strategies that aim to target specific community needs. In this way, compliance with the law is increased to create balance within the community to protect the greater community at large. On the whole, a great conclusion!
Wow, a brilliant essay Neila! Like, seriously wonderful. A fantastic focus on evaluation, some great evidence, and a well sustained Thesis with lots of layers of complexity. All the big stuff you've done REALLY well, so brilliant job! You should be really proud ;D
See the comments above for a few little things - A few structural issues where you stray a little bit from where the paragraph started, only little adjustments would fix it. A few tiny tone issues that just strike me as 'off' in an essay - See, when your essay is good, I have to nitpick ;)
A side note - Normally I would say you need to introduce some actual cases (R v Banana, like court cases) and legislation. However, given the nature of the topic, I don't think that is necessary. Check your criteria and maybe your teacher, because I don't think you would be expected to include the same sorts of evidence as you normally would in this essay. The essay you did have was great and linked to the argument well - Just remember you don't need a whole lot of detail, focus on the analysis! :)
Once again, a really awesome essay, great work! ;D
Hi
this is like my first ever crime essay that i have written and i was wondering if i could please get some feedback. i dont know if im even doing it right and even if im properly 'assessing' it. Could you also please provide me suggestions in how to reduce my word count please?Thank You very much!
ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM WHEN DEALING WITH YOUNG OFFENDERS
Hey guys,
It would be great if I could have my essay marked in response to the question:
Investigate a contemporary human rights issue and evaluate the effectiveness of legal and non-legal responses to the issue. 15 marks
In particular, what areas can I cull in this essay? I need to write this AND 3x 5 markers in one hour and I know that I can't have an essay this length in the exam. Also, my first paragraph is on legal measures on an international scale. Should i have that much evidence on the abolition of slavery or is this irrelevant to human trafficking? I was thinking maybe I could replace this with a few mentions of either ICESCR, ICCPR or ICC and ICJ with mention of human trafficking for the purpose of child soldiers, since that's more contemporary. I'd also like to incorporate more media reports but at the same time I need to balance this with the word limit. Right now this sits on 1037 words, which I want to cut down to 900. Sorry for any grammatical errors or disjointed sentences, it's my first draft and I got a bit sick of essay writing towards the end :P Thanks in advance!
Hey rodero! Would love to give you some feedback - See the spoiler below! ;DSpoilerInvestigate a contemporary human rights issue and evaluate the effectiveness of legal and non-legal responses to the issue. 15 marks
The changing values of human society have resulted in greater emphasis on the abolition of human trafficking and slavery. Undeniably, the combination of legal and nonlegal responses have been moderately effective in minimising violations to human rights, on both a domestic and international level. I think you need to create a stronger link to human rights before launching into your evaluation, just to make sure you address the question. Despite Australia’s efficiencies in upholding these fundamental rights, international measures require further enforceability and promotion, for human rights to be upheld universally. Nice Thesis! Direct, to the point - I like it! The argument is sophisticated - Domestic good, international not so much. Great work there too.
The first legal recognition of human rights occurred on an international level, and effectively provided a catalyst for reform world-wide. The rapid spread of the abolitionist movement in the 18th century is largely credited to the efforts of William Wilberforce, and his campaign against slavery. His efforts pressured global legal responses, including the Slave Trade Act 1807 (UK); Britain’s first codified law prohibiting human trafficking. This historical information, I would say that it is fairly irrelevant. It doesn't really relate to the effectiveness of responses to the issue today. However, 'investigating' the issue could involve some historical information being in the essay? Perhaps check your criteria to be sure ;D The effectiveness of such legal responses is evident in the implementation of various legislation, such as the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (UK) and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America in 1865. These preceding legal responses highlight measures to prohibit human trafficking for the intention of forced labour, effectively upholding fundamental human rights. Which human rights specifically? Again, we've not quite made that last step of linking human trafficking to human rights just yet. The promotion of these rights culminate following the creation of the United Nations (UN) and the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR); Article 4 states that ‘no one shall be held in slavery or servitude’. Nice reference. However, the UDHR is classified as ‘soft law’ due to it’s lack of enforceability, thus compromising its effectiveness in preventing human trafficking. Fabulous - Would be good to pop a case study in here as an example. Similarly, the UN Convention on the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons 2000, aimed to protect individuals from, and punish offenders for human trafficking. Despite providing the first universally agreed definition on human trafficking, the UN has been criticised as being a ‘toothless tiger’ due to its incapability to punish offenders, and its heavy reliance on compliance by sovereign states. Therefore, it is undeniable that international legal measures catalysed the abolition of human trafficking and slavery, though it’s effectiveness in the modern era is limited due to a lack of enforceability. I LOVE the argument you are presenting, it is taking centre stage and it is argued really, really well. Check your criteria to see, but I think that historical information at the start could go and be replaced with a more argument based introduction.
Moreover, the implementation of non-legal initiatives have been vastly effective in the promotion of human rights, through its ability to raise awareness and pressure government measures against human trafficking. Fabulous introduction. The effective role of NGOs is evident in the UK-American Anti Slavery Group, which has advocated for the rights of people and the abolition of human trafficking since 1839. These non-legal measures have been enhanced following the establishment of the Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking; A UN initiative that works alongside NGOs in their campaigns and provides assistance to victims. Excellent example. According to the National Association of Attorneys General, ‘collaborating with NGOs is essential in all facets of addressing the crime of modern-day trafficking’, which highlights the necessity of NGOs in upholding human rights on a universal scale. Nice use of quote - And it isn't doing the work for you either, just improving your already established argument, which is excellent. Furthermore, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) supports the implementation of basic workers rights worldwide, particularly the rights of human trafficking victims. Despite international measures, their policies are not legally binding, so are limited to simply raising awareness and pressuring government bodies. Be sure to be specific in saying that these are representative of ineffectiveness - The argument needs to be obvious in every step of the paragraph. The ILO emphasises the essentiality of further progress, with their estimate of a current 21 million victims of human trafficking. That sentence a little unnecessary - Could ditch it, but I know it plays into your conclusion to the paragraph. Tough call, aha! Therefore, the role of non-legal measures have clearly contributed to the promotion and enforcement of human rights, though progress must still be done alongside government bodies for these rights to be experienced on a global scale. Fabulous paragraph, really well argued!
Likewise, human trafficking has been addressed on a domestic level, and has achieved high degrees of success as a result of legal measures. Watch syntax there - It sounds like you are saying human trafficking has been successful (sorry, nitpick ;)) The first codified recognition of human rights in Australia was established in the Criminal Code (Slavery and Sexual Servitude) Amendment Act 1999 (Cth), which makes human trafficking and slavery a crime and thus, punishable by the state. This legislation allowed for the first conviction of a woman for sex slavery in Australia in the case R v Wei Tang 2009. Tang’s 10 year conviction effectively set a binding precedent from the High Court, stating that prosecutors must only need to prove the offender’s intent to exercise powers attaching to ownership. Some fabulous examples above, EXCEPT that you didn't analyse any of them! There was no evaluation in those examples, it was just statement of fact - Be really careful not to fall into that trap. The effectiveness of Australia’s legal measures are supported in the 2012 Trafficking in Persons report, which classifies Australia as a Tier 1 country in best preventing human trafficking offences. Nice! I like when people use less obvious examples - It gives depth to the response. These government measures are heightened in the 2004 Commonwealth Action Plan to Eradicate Trafficking in Persons, which announced a total contribution of $58.7 million AUD in funding; This effectively united the police, the immigration department and NGOs to cooperate and respond to human trafficking domestically. Any specific measures that came from this action plan? Therefore, legal measures adopted by the Australian government have been exceedingly effective in the enforceability of human trafficking violations, and the protection of fundamental human rights. Excellent paragraph! Watch that you are always evaluating, and in terms of trimming words, you could perhaps ditch the Action Plan piece of evidence - Without any tangible outcomes from it, it isn't doing a whole lot for you.
Furthermore, Australian non-legal measures have operated effectively on a domestic level to raise awareness and contribute to the abolition of human trafficking and slavery. In particular, the role of NGOs and the media have been crucial to reward Australia with its aforementioned Tier 1 classification by the TIP. These efficiencies can be credited to media documentaries, such as ‘Trafficked’ in 2006, which achieved over 500,000 viewers and informed the audience of sexual slavery in Australia. Great piece of evidence - Excellent work on going further with it than just listing it as another example. Undeniably, the ability for media to educate the Australian population is an essential factor which promotes action by NGOs and government bodies. These non-legal measures are enhanced by the University of Technology Sydney’s Anti Slavery Project, which works alongside government agencies to advertise and eliminate modern slavery. According to the UTS Newsroom, The UTS Anti-Slavery Project has been ‘hailed number one in the world’, as an NGO that has ‘real potential to effect social change’. However, these positive measures do not completely eradicate the issue of human trafficking; The Global Survey Index estimates an approximate 3000 people experiencing slavery in Australia. Therefore, non-legal measures within Australia have evidently had an immense degree of effectiveness in abolishing human trafficking, though it requires further progress to provide fundamental human rights to all. Not much to say for this paragraph - As equally effective as all those above ;D
Conclusively, the combination of legal and nonlegal responses to human trafficking have upheld human rights and provided justice to a moderate extent. Although domestic measures have certainly achieved a high degree of effectiveness, the lack of enforceability on an international level limits the ability for human rights to be experienced universally. Simple conclusion, but it does the job. If you have time you could expand and restate your argument more fully, but this definitely still works.
Seriously brilliant essay rodero, definitely looking in that Band 5/Band 6 range!! You have put the argument at the centre of your response, which is exactly what you need to do for an evaluate question. A heap of excellent examples which for the most part are very well linked to that argument - There are not really many negative things I can say about this essay, it's wonderful :)
That said, it's my job to give you a few ;)
First, just watch that you are answering the question properly by establishing a link to human rights. This can be done in your Thesis and then relatively ignored from that point, but it does need to be done (linking to specific articles in the UDHR/ICCPR/ICESCR would be the most impressive way to do that) ;D
As for that abolition of slavery stuff, as I said in the comments throughout, I do think its a little irrelevant. Check with your criteria and your teacher to confirm that "investigating" the issue doesn't need a historical aspect. If it doesn't, that stuff can definitely be removed/replaced at your leisure ;D
You could definitely integrate stuff on child soldiers if you like, but I don't view it as 'missing' per say! Like, your essay doesn't need that extra information unless you want it. Ditto with the media reports - They'd be nice but definitely not necessary :)
Read through my comments above for a few other niggling issues, but on the whole, this is an excellent response! Seriously great stuff rodero :) :) :)
Thanks Jamon :) I've switched the historical part of slavery with human trafficking for the purpose of child soldiers. Thanks to the feedback I noticed that my essay was just a bunch of evidence dumping with little evaluation. I've decided to have less evidence with more analysis. This way i'm not including any irrelevant measures which don't support my argument. So far this has been really good in culling my essay, so thanks again! :)
Hi I was wondering if I can get feedback on this essay on the decline of parliament thesis.
I was quite confused while I writing it. Help would be greatly appreciated because at this point I feel like I simply rambled on with information rather answering the question. Advice on what I should do instead would be of great help :-[
Feedback on what examples that could strength my response would be helpful as well because my test is on Tuesday :)
Yep yep, it's on my to do list for tomorrow morning, but that does fall outside the realms of the HSC, so my feedback might be of limited use :)
Feedback on what examples that could strength my response would be helpful as well because my test is on Tuesday :)
Overall, I think this is a really solid piece and you know the ins and outs of Parliament far better than I, you should be pleased!
Goooood morning anotherworld :) Thanks for always sticking around the forums, even though the help is limited because we have a different syllabus! You're super dedicated and I really hope your marks reflect this in the end! :)SpoilerThere are four main roles of the Commonwealth Parliament. These roles include the Legislative Function, the Representative Function, the Responsibility Function, and the debate function which acts as a Forum for Debate.The decline of Australian? Parliament is evident in how it fails fulfill its key functions All 4 key functions? Just some key functions? Be a little more specific in which functions. . It fails to provide effective scrutiny of Bills in theory because of tactics employed by the executive in practise; members of Parliament are loyal to parties rather than to their electorate; and because of the dominance of the executive, it is not effective as a forum for debate.
The Legislative function parliament should initiate, deliberate and finally pass legislation, New sentence here. however, successful scrutiny of bills have declined in the 55th Parliament. Parliament is bicameral and makes laws that can be initiated by any member of Parliament. In theory these laws are scrutinised by the ‘statutory process’ (derived from British practice) in which in depth analysis ensures ‘good legislation’ and if necessary amended by parliament. Again in theory, the legislative function of Parliament should have a committee stage which provides opportunities for expert advice and non partisan highly detailed work on the bill. However, in practice the legislative is dominated by the executive in which executive tactics are used to dominate the house of Representatives, which prevents it from fulfilling its essential functions .Executive tactics such as gag, guillotin and floodgating all share the same goal in limiting the time in which bills are scrutinised. Furthermore in practise, few Bills are really initiated in the House of Representatives, opportunities for debate are limited, and government legislation is assured passage through the House. Can you get a stat to say exactly how many? It is evident that the fulfillment of the legislative function has strayed and declined. A modern example of executive dominance is the 2015, in which the Opposition Leader Bill Shorten and Deputy Opposition Tanya Plibersek co-sponsored a private Members Bill called the marriage Amendment Bill 2015 to legislate for marriage equality.
Another role of the Commonwealth parliament is the Representative function that specifies Parliament should provide a voice for the interests and opinions of electors. In theory the House of Representatives should act in the interests of their constituents through either delegate or trustee representation. The Australian public expects Parliament to reflect the will of the people as per the intentions of the democratic process of election; for MHRs to represent the views and interests of their electorate; and that the Parliament reflects a broad cross-section of society. However, in practise the House of Representatives tend to act in the interest of their parties through partisan representation.This may be due to the fact that members of the house of Representative only serve a 3 year term in which party loyalty will play a beneficial part in their upcoming election due to the fact that electors tend to vote according to party rather than for individual candidates. In parliament, Members of the house of Representatives follow the party line. In the ALP, parliamentarians are pledged to support the party policy and vote as a bloc in parliament. The Liberal Party theoretically gives members the free vote, but they almost always vote according to party policy reflecting the influence of party solidarity. In theory the Senate should act in the interests of their state as reflected by ’Sovereign State Interest’ in which senate was created ‘to represent the interest of the six sovereign states within commonwealth Parliament’. In practice the extent of decline of parliament in the Senate seems to be of a lesser magnitude. This may be due to the length of term in which a senator serves is twice as long as a member of the House of Representatives. This implies that the pressure to be elected again is of a lesser extent which suggests that mirror representation is stronger. There are few examples of delegate/trustee representation. One of them is when Liberal Member of Parliament Sharman Stone acted in the interests of her constituents over the possible closure of SPC Ardmona, a fruit canning business, in her Victorian electorate of Murray in 2014. She criticised her own Liberal party government over its decision not to offer financial support to the company. Thus...then we need to move back to the evaluative statement, we've ended on evidence, when ending on a judgement re-enforces your argument.
The accountability and responsibility function is required to hold all decisions and actions made by executive power accountable by carrying out scrutiny of government administration. This involves collective ministerial responsibility in which governments take collective responsibility for their decisions and should resign if the lower house passes a successful vote of no confidence. It also involves individual ministerial responsibility where Ministers are accountable to parliament for their conduct and should resign if parliament passes a censure motion against them. In theory scrutinising government spending is a key role of the responsibility function in which money bills pass through parliament. A modern example in which a minister resigned before a censure motion was passed against them due to suspected government spending of taxpayer money is the scandal involving Health Minister Sussan Ley purchased a $800k unit on taxpayer-funded trip to the Gold Coast which ultimately resulted her resignation. In practice the government consists of the party with majority support in the lower house with its leader becoming the Prime Minister. Governments must resign if they lose the support of the house. But the majority requirement in the House of Representatives ensures that the government dominates.This is because in reality, the house will almost never lose the support of the lower house since it controls the votes of the members (party solidarity) who make up that majority. This means that the effectiveness of individual and collective ministerial responsibility are not effective in practice. Motions of no-confidence and censure motions moved by the Opposition will always be defeated ‘on party lines’ in the House of Representatives which means ‘partisan’ Members of Parliament simply vote to support their party’s position which is another reason why individual and collective responsibility are not effective in practice. Great analysis at the end here!
The forum of debate function is where Parliament is expected to discuss and debate issues of national importance. Parliamentary committees often investigate and report on general issues, which provides an opportunity for the awareness of community views to the raised. In theory the House of Representatives is a House of debate. Opportunities to debate include ministerial, grievances and second readings which are linked to the responsibility, representative and legislative functions respectively. However in practice during debate, government can use the gag, guillotine and floodgating to limit discussion and quickly pass bills. This causes the House of Representatives to suffer from the dominance of the executive in parliament. Furthermore Government can restrict opportunities when it allocates time for the sitting day. This means that time can be manipulated in a way that will result in the government always winning such as making it the longest items on the sitting day agenda. In addition grievances, urgency motions, matters of Public Importance , adjournment and other other debate opportunities are diminished when the government extends government business. Collectively the limit imposed debate during the legislative process further complies to the decline of parliament thesis.
Parliament is unsuccessful in fulfilling its roles which is supported by the ‘decline of parliament’ thesis. Parliament is expected to represent the whole of Australia by scrutinizing bills but is now dominated by major parties, Members are loyal to their party rather than their electorate, and Bills only have limited time to be debated.
Despite what you think, I think this has a very clear structure. You're approaching each arm of parliament per paragraph and I think it works really well.
I think you've hardly approached the idea of the "decline of Parliament." Instead, we've given all the reason it fails, but decline insinuates at some point the quality was higher, and it is going down. I think comparative facts would be very useful in this time. I mentioned above that a stat on the number of bills introduced would be great for your argument, but what would be even better for the "decline" thesis is to measure this against a previous time. You've certainly argued well that the Parliament does not fulfill it's job - it fails. But the "decline" idea only appears strongly in your intro and conclusion. I'd love to see it more!
What I'd love to see more of is comparative facts that make your point powerful. You argue the theory and the practice well with your words, but I'm forced to trust that you're telling the truth because there's no persuasive facts. I believe you are telling the truth! But in a HSC essay, such facts would be required for the top works, so I assume it's similar in your system too.
Overall, I think this is a really solid piece and you know the ins and outs of Parliament far better than I, you should be pleased!
Thanks for tagging in! ;D I momentarily forgot the time zone difference and was flabbergasted you were marking at 6am ;)
Thank you so much for your feedback
Hi Jamon, could you please check my essay and help me cut down. I am doing family law ;D
My in-class exam is on Monday and I am so nervous because my teacher keeps telling me she can't check any part of my writing :'( sorry its such late notice but any feedback is appreciated!
When you are marking, could you also suggest as to how I can manipulate my current examples/evidence to fit a question that focuses on the theme of 'encouraging cooperation and conflict' in regards to the contemporary issues?
Thank you!
I'll definitely get you some feedback on this before your exam tomorrow Grace! It might not be until this evening though unfortunately :-\
I have an essay question and I do not know what to discuss, the question is "to what extent does the law reflect the moral and ethical standards of society"
I was going to write about bail but I don't know what else to include. Any help would be appreciated :)
So with your essay tomorrow, I'll just say one thing: Brilliant. Definitely in the Band 6 range, fantastic evidence, fantastic analysis - My comments throughout are nitpicks, because you've done a wonderful job! ;D
I think there are places where your writing could be more succinct, or your arguments a little more direct, but those aren't issues to worry about with your exam so close - Those are long term things. It's an incredible essay nonetheless.
As for adapting the essay to the cooperation theme, the first paragraph should be easy for that. Just talk about how cooperation is key to recognising the children. For homosexuality paragraphs, talk about how cooperation between GLBTI Rights lobbies, conservative lobbies, and the lawmakers is essential to effective reforms. Surrogacy is the tough one - I'm not quite sure how that will fit - It might require just addressing different ideas?
You should be really proud of this Grace, well done ;D
I have an essay question and I do not know what to discuss, the question is "to what extent does the law reflect the moral and ethical standards of society"
I was going to write about bail but I don't know what else to include. Any help would be appreciated :)
Thank you so much for doing this on such short notice, you are amazing!!! Your feedback has been so helpful and you have definitely given me confidence for tomorrow's exam so THANK YOU AGAIN! ;D ;D
When you said above "arguments a little more direct" can you give me an example? I'm not really worried for now but I guess it would be good to know anyway for the hsc :)
Sure! So like, at some points, you could skip a little of the extra detail/explanation and just get to the point a bit more quickly. For example:
However, as evident in the case of R v BW and SW, parents faced imprisonment due to the neglect and starvation of their daughter Ebony and while the law was enforced, it highlighted that the law has failed to protect the child. In a similar case seen in The Australian’s 2007 article ‘Starved Shellay’s death of torture’, the Department of Community Services (DoCS) was aware of Shellay’s welfare as far back as 2004 but failed to take further measures which highlights that the law failed significantly in protecting childrens’ safety. Furthermore, in 2007, it was found that more than 150 children who had previously been known to DoCS died at the hands of their abusive parents. This called for major reforms to not only increase child care and protection, but also to introduce an enforceable ‘follow-up’ mechanism that will enable DoCS or other services to regularly monitor children ‘at risk of significant harm.’ The Wood Inquiry Report 2008 came about as a result of these highly publicised deaths, and the government was highly responsive in reforming the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) to become the Children Legislation Amendment (Wood Inquiry Recommendations) Act 2009.
Now I'm not saying I would condense it this much, but I could write this:
The failures of the legal system to protect children in cases such as R v BW and SW, or more profile cases like those within The Australian’s 2007 article ‘Starved Shellay’s death of torture,' lead to the Wood Inquiry Report in 2008. The subsequent reform of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) to become the Children Legislation Amendment (Wood Inquiry Recommendations) Act 2009, demonstrates exceptional responsiveness by the NSW legislature.
See how I've trimmed all the excess away, and am just left with a piece of evidence (group of evidence in this case) and an argument? No case details, no extras - Just BAM. Again, you might not want to condense it this much, but if you can trim some fat from your writing, you'll be much more direct with your arguments, and have room to back yourself up more ;D
DAMN Jamon that is good. My teacher also said in my last exam that I needed to get to the point faster hahah :P
So I just sat my exam...I think it went pretty well in terms of quickly evaluating the effectiveness of my examples. So thank you so much, your feedback helped heaps! I found it a bit difficult to get out about 1200 words in the 45mins though :-\
Hi!
Was just wondering if you could give me some feedback on my human rights essay? Its a hand-in component along with an in-class exam on Monday!
Thanks heaps!!
Hey, I am working on some 15 mark essays for my up coming exam for legal.
Wondering you can check my Young offender essay (without conclusion)
thanks.
Hey absdatar99! Thanks for posting your essay, but our essay marking rules require 15 posts per piece of detailed feedback, just to make sure the markers can keep up and provide the detailed feedback we like to give ;DOk no worries, thanks for the feedback anyway. 👍
So you've not quite qualified for detailed feedback just yet (but you can get there quick if you hang around) ;D it looks good on a quick skim though! Looks like you are frequently evaluating which is great - Try to incorporate more LCTMRS (Laws, Cases, Treaties, Media, Reports, Statistics, and other evidence) to make your argument stronger :)
hi i was wondering if you could help me in how to go about planning an essay for this question
Examine the role of discretion in achieving justice for victims, offenders and society within the criminal justice system.
should i answer it with a paragraph for each victims, offenders, society or...?
thank you so much in advance
Hey Kia! That's definitely how I'd do it - The only other thing you could do is try a case study approach, doing a paragraph on each case/situation and analysing how discretion impacted on its outcomes. In my opinion this is tougher - Your idea would be my approach ;D
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 :(
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.
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.
Hi!! This is a section of my legal essay and really appreciate it if someone can give feedback on it.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 :)
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.
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!
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.
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 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!SpoilerDiscuss 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 Courts interpretation should lack bias in their decisions.Australias 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 lawsareconflict 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 Courts 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 Commonwealths 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 :)
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 effectiveness.
thanks heaps guys! :) :) :) :) :)
thank you for your feedback :D
I really appreciate it :)
Hey Kiiaaa! We can mark this for you :)SpoilerEVALUATE 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 odd phrasing, I suggest adjusting this so we don't lose meaning. 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. I think I want to reverse this intro a little. Your judgement finally comes at the end, but I'd love to see it first up so we can view your entire essay through the lens of your argument! So, in the first sentence you identified who the people are that you will be marking the effectiveness against, but didn't actually make comment on the effectiveness, nor did "means of achieving justice" get a mention in the intro! Legal intros aren't the thing that will necessarily drop you a band if done poorly, it's just a matter of setting the right tone for your essay from the very start. If this were my essay, the first sentence would be outright making the judgement on how it is a means for achieving justice, and perhaps I'd identify the three groups I want to consider the justice for. Then the rest of the introduction can flow on from there, but I think that judgement is important because it was only delivered in your last sentence of the intro.
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). Wonderful quote!!! 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 With the argument about it being an aggravating factor - I think you need to flesh this out more. This isn't necessarily a drawback, in fact, the VIS is delivered in an emotive way quite often to fully provide scope of the impact of the crime on the victim, hoping that the judge will make the right sentencing decision based on how the crime affected the victim, THUS achieving justice for the victim. So you can say that perhaps a dramatised VIS will sway a judge into a harsher sentence than what would be suitable to be just, as it is so emotive rather than going by the facts of legislation, but I think you'd need to prove both sides of the coin here. . Hence victim impact statement only provide justice to a certain degree as it can impact the offender Similar to the introduction, the delivery of the argument comes at the end of the paragraph. I'd love to see it at the beginning as well, and linked to throughout. That way there is no question in a marker's mind about which argument you are trying to nail home. I'll suggest some other points for you to discuss when it comes to victims as well, because you've touched on a few points without really engaging with them (as I've suggested how to when talking about VIS). So hopefully this gives you an idea on how to go about this. So, still on the topic of VIS - consider the way they can be delivered by CCTV now after amendments to the act, consider the fact that families can deliver the VIS for deceased victims (also consider how this could be seen as unfair if a victim has no family, therefore they miss the opportunity to have a VIS presented), consider the R V Bilal Skaf case and how that was called to retrial, and how the victim's evidence was handled in that (another case for you!). In the R V Osland case,link to media interview here, Osland claimed she was too traumatised to present her evidence in a court, thus she never got to provide the full scope of the events... "I got so traumatised (in court) that no matter what questions they put to me I just couldn’t remember. I know that at one stage the prosecutor was firing all these questions at me and I was just agreeing with him. Whatever he said, I just said yes, when I should have said no. I was saying no when I should have been saying yes. The more they pressured me the more I started to close down." In saying this, the Osland case is unique because Osland was a victim of domestic violence, but she killed her husband. So she was on trial for the murder, but a victim of the DV crime. Still usable for your argument!
It is imperative for courts to consider alternatives to sentencing being circle sentencing Not sure what this means? Do you mean, "such as 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. Do you have the exact stats? 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 awkward wording, 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,comma 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. This paragraph raises some good points, but it is written in a way that detracts from the arguments a bit. It's just a bit convoluted. I'll suggest a basic structure that you can slide your argument into, and then adjust everything within it as you please in order to suit your writing style!
Sentence one: Identify argument and effectiveness
-Provide background (what legislation is it in? What is it? When did it come into play? Whatever is necessary
-Give fact/argument/statistic
-Is this effective for the victim/suspect/offender? To what degree? Who benefits most or least?
-Any last stat/fact to back that up?
-Next argument.
It seems too simple, but I know when you're writing a legal essay you're trying to engage with so many different points at the one time and you're trying to draw on quotes and reports and legislation and all the rest. So if you kind of pull all the evidence back, and then slot it into a neat little structure, you'll find yourself really making a far more convincing argument :)
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.
I've put the vast majority of my comments within the spoiler, so just look for the bold font :) What I do like about what you're doing is trying to engage with the different perspectives at once, and by engaging with the victim, society, and the offender with each point you make. Unfortunately, the clarity of the argument does get lost a little as you do this. The clearest paragraph is the one that focuses on the VIS, and I think it's no coincidence that it has happened because you are focusing on the group of victims, with mention of the society and offender too. It's ok to privilege one group over the others in a paragraph if it means you're achieving clarity. I don't so much think that the content of your work is a problem, but rather just the way you're expressing it means your argument gets lost. In saying this, when you organise your paragraphs you'll likely see places for improvement in relation to evidence and what not, as you clear the way to slide more of that in. Where I've seen places for improving the argument, I've suggested cases and links.
Ultimately, this is not at all a bad essay. I can really see that you understand a lot of what is being asked of you, we just need to work on a way of expressing that in a way that reveals what you really know! Let me know if you have more questions - I know this is a lot to take in! :)
No worries anotherworld :)
I attempted to respond to this question but I'm not how to critically reflect my understanding of itSpoiler
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.
Hi Guys, I would really, really appreciate if someone could mark this for me? I am in desperate need of something at full marks because right now I'm at about 81% and I really want to get this up to a 90. Thank you so much!
Hey Jamon, thank you so much! I will print this out and have a read, look over and perfect over the next day or so! Would I be allowed to resubmit once I have re-edited it? Thanks again! Mary
Hey guys :)
This is probably something that's never been asked, but I really need some help right now.
Basically my issue is that I am very unprepared for my exam coming up (tomorrow). I have a given question and all but i've been so caught up with other subjects that legal has been thrown aside. I completely understand if you won't allow it, but would it be possible to send in half of my essay now, and the other half tonight? If you won't allow it, that's completely fine and i'm happy to pay up 15 posts for each post.
Hey Jamon!
Thanks for the feedback, it's helped out a lot :)
I was planning to have the rest of my essay done by now but I don't really think that's happening any time soon... Anyway, I have a paragraph which I really am not proud of so if you guys could take a look and give some pointers that would be great! Particularly for this one, i'm really not sure if I should have the US invasion of Iraq in there. I more so feel forced by my teacher to have some mention of the ICJ, and so I've thrown it in where I can. In the end, if you guys don't think it fits that's good enough for me to take it out, but he's marking the exam so I really want to be able to mention it somewhere in my response.
Also, i completely understand if this doesn't end up being marked. I've left the task to the last minute and i'm posting at the worst time so I guess it's my burden to handle. Anyway, whatever help I can get would be great. Thanks :)
You are welcome! ;D happy to give this a quick skim too, comments in bold!SpoilerAlthough the UN has effectively responded to the threat of a nuclear war, a lack of prosecution has hindered the ability for world order to be maintained. Nice start, clear judgement with reasoning. Following the events of the cold war, the UN has actively supported denuclearisation as a means of achieving global peace and stability. These are demonstrated through bilateral treaties such as START 1, where the US and Russia agreed to reduce their nuclear arsenals by 58,000. Likewise, multilateral treaties including the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) promote the peaceful use of energy resources and a complete nuclear disarmament. Fantastic examples here, make sure you reference them correctly with their full name and the year in the first instance - I'd also like a more obvious judgement in reference to these measures. Are they effective? Enforceable? Despite these measures, state sovereignty remains a potent barrier for the UN to achieve world order; Although North Korea was initially a signatory to the the NPT, its withdrawal in 2003 has been followed with the detonation of nuclear devices. In the current global climate, the use of nuclear weapons has been deemed the “biggest threat to humanity” (Lawrence Krauss on BBC’s Q&A), largely due to NK’s unwillingness to comply with international law. Nice analysis and use of a quote there. The continued conduction of nuclear tests by the ‘rogue state’ (Anthony Lake) has pressured the UN to impose sanctions as a means of political persuasion. However, the use of international negotiation continues to have little effect on the behaviour of NK, leaving the global community with a high chance of a “major conflict with North Korea” (Donald Trump). These little quotes throughout aren't adding much, I'd just stick to doing it in your own words, if you would find it easier. Also be careful you aren't slipping into a recount, like "They signed, they withdrew, they blew shit up, they got sanctioned." Really, they key bit of this is the withdrawal (shows ineffectiveness/non enforceable) and the sanctions (did they work?). With regards to a more regional conflict, the UN remains unresponsive to the US’ illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Although the US claimed to have acted in ‘self-defence’, members of the International Commission of Jurists highlight that the invasion was a clear breach of the UN Charter and was not authorised by the UNSC. Thus demonstrating ineffectiveness... Be sure your judgement is made obvious at every step! Despite this, the ICJ has failed to punish the US for clear acts of aggression, thus turning a “blind eye to one of the most blatant human rights abuses” (Jean Shaoul). I think the ICJ reference works - I'd leave it! :) With respect, it clear that the UN has achieved success in past success in the disarmament of nuclear weapons, but is restricted by state sovereignty to enforce its policies for peace in North Korea and the US. Take out 'with respect,' - This is not an opinion piece persay, you are presenting facts and using them to form an argument. It's an academic piece, you'd say "with respect" in a letter to the editor or a speech or something non academic. As a result, UN responses to regional and global conflict has been effective only to a moderate extent.
Works well I think rodero! Make sure judgements are clear at every stage would be my primary piece of feedback :)
Geeez that was one fast response. Thank you so much! I'm currently fueled with caffeine and anxiety and it might be reflected in the paragraphs i'm posting, but I'm so thankful that you're able to point out my mistakes. Thanks :)
Hi guys, would greatly appreciate it if you could mark my essay
Haven't gotten around to do an intro or conclusion yet though
Hi essays markers, would u be able to have a look at this essay for world order, its due on Wednesday , thanks
Hi guys I have a family law essay due on thursday and was wondering if you guys could check through it as my teacher is horrible at replying and when she does it's the same feedback of "just make sure your argument is clear", so was wondering if you guys had any other feedback on how to improve this. Also really struggling with the conclusion so any feedback is helpful! Thanks heaps.
Hey guys, this is my introduction for my world order essay on effectiveness of legal/non-legal measures in Syria.
Intros are usually the hardest part for me to write :/
Hey Kirri! I'd be happy to give this some feedback - As above though, you should try and get it to us a little earlier next time! That way you've got proper time to read and apply the feedback. Nevertheless, hopefully my comments are helpful! I've attached your essay with comments in bold:Thank you so much for your feedback i will definitely take it on board!!! Much appreciated. Thank you :))SpoilerEvaluate whether legal and nonlegal responses have achieved just outcomes for family members and society in regards to domestic violence?
Domestic violence (DV) is defined as any act, whether verbal or physical, of a violent or abusive nature that takes place within a domestic relationship (Cambridge, 2006). I know there is a big thing about defining terms, but you definitely shouldn't be defining domestic violence. Your marker knows what it is already! DV as a rising issue among society caused by the changing values of communities, into the unacceptable nature of harm within relationships. A little unclear what you are saying there. With the issue coming to light it places legal and non legal responses in a better position to be able to “catch up” in the achievement of just outcomes for families and societies. Good, I like that perspective! Legal responses are proven to be adequate on paper but lacking in the practicality in the enforcement in the achievement of just outcomes. Little expression issue there - To many "in the"s! Similarly non legal responses prove effective in the promotion and raising awareness of the issue, though, being restrained within the limitations of holding no legal enforceability. With 1 in 3 women experiencing physical violence since the age of 15 (AIC, 2015), highlights the need for further achievement of just outcomes for family members and society in DV. Overall, I like this introduction! Makes your argument clear and runs through your key points. Watch for expression and make sure you use the space efficiently.
One legal response designed to protect the applicant from violence and other forms of intimidation or abuse by the offender are, ADVOs (Legal Aid NSW, nd). Try to make the judgement in the first sentence - Make it obvious straight away! The introduction of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Amendment Bill 2013 (NSW) reinforced previous legislation by refining the guidelines. How? A tad more specific here. Now enabling police to issue provisional ADVO’s and holding the power to detain someone until the offender has received an ADVO (NSW Police, 2013). Good. Therefore providing just outcomes in the protection of families and general society, as having been regarded as the “single most practical meaningful reform in combating domestic violence” (On the Spot ADVO’s to protect women, The Aus 2013). Careful, you are flowing your ideas through multiple sentences but not really joining them properly, just a little off on the expression. Good use of media though. Though alternatively the ineffectiveness of enforcement, in the Daily Telegraphs article “Slap on the wrist for AVOs”, Alicia reports that “only 12.4% of apprehended ADVO breaches are punished by jail time with the average sentence being only 4 months” (Daily Telegraph 2015). Nice statistic - Again though, watch expression. Proving the achievement of little justice for family members as their is none to little enforcement of ADVO breaches, dangerously causing the offenders to believe that an ADVO is “just a piece of paper” to which compliance is optional. Nice argument. Limited supervision and enforcement of offenders, give them opportunities to breach their restrictions, putting the victim at risk as seen by the Jean Majdalawi (1996) case. Try and use the proper referencing format, if you can. This case proves the ineffectiveness of legal responses in achieving justice for the victims and society, as Jean was brutally murdered whilst on an ADVO, due to the offenders resentfulness and desire for revenge. Naomi Toy states in “2007 23,176 ADVOs were issued in NSW and in the same year there were more than 10,000 recorded breaches” (Daily Telegraph, 2008), highlighting the ineffectiveness in justice for victim and society, in the outrages reoffending numbers. Therefore proving that ADVOs as a legal response can provide a temporary and efficient protection for the victim, though the unsupervised nature and lack of practical enforcement, places the victim at high potential risk. Nice judgements made and good pieces of evidence. I think your expression is the thing that is holding you back - It could be more succinct and more direct, some places the reader (marker) is doing a bit more work than they should be to follow what you are saying!
Further ineffectiveness in achieving justice is shown through the enforcement of DV offenders seeking bail. What do you mean by enforcement of DV offenders seeking bail? Slightly unclear. Under section 9A of the Bail Act 1978 (NSW) it explicitly stated that bail would be declined to a DV offender or an individual who breached their ADVO, though this act was amended in 2013. In the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) under section 19, it states that an individual will be refused bail if they are deemed an “unacceptable risk” in the “endangerment of safety of victims, individuals or the community” (Austlii, 2013). Don't quote Austlii here, that's just the law itself. No citation needed. Thus proving the reform ineffective as it is the judge's discretion to which individuals they deem as an “endangerment”, as opposed to the 1978 in which it was explicitly outlined that their bail shall be refused. I like how you've picked the law apart - Good work. The further review of the bail system for DV offenders, had a massive push for reform in February 2017 after the media outburst following Teresa Bradford death. Expression. David Bradford had been jailed on serious DV charges and then got granted bail, who following this broke into his wife’s home and brutally stabbed her in front of their four children, before killing himself. Thus proving the ineffectiveness of legal responses in achieving just outcomes for individuals and society, in the now ease in which DV offenders are being released on bail. Expression - You can't start a sentence with "Thus" the way you are doing in this paragraph, it should be "Thus, this proves the ineffectiveness...".
Another legal measure that aims at tackling DV is the Family Court of Australia (FCA), under the provision of the Family Law Act 1995 (Cth). Effectiveness?
Make judgement immediately. With the aim of intervention and protection of children in DV relationships, it is moderately effective in its protection of children under the The Convention on the Rights Of the Child 1989 (CROC). Though the FCA proves effective when making judgements and imposing penalties as it takes into account previous DV/violent history, achieving justice for victims in putting their safety first (Family Court of Australia, 2016). Theoretically on paper this would be highly effective, though in practice it’s highly ineffective, proved in the Rosie Batty DV case in 2014. Nice use of evidence in this paragraph - Varied and judgements are obvious. Good work. Where the rights over the parents were placed above the rights of the son Luke, in allowing the father to be involved in his life. Expression - You've started this sentence in mid thought - What does "where" refer to? I know it is the case, but that was in the previous sentence. The expression can really hamper the sophistication of what you are writing. The Victorian Coroner Ian Gray said to ABC News in 2015, that his investigation identified "a number of gaps or flaws" in the family violence system. This case demonstrates the ineffectiveness of legal responses such as the FCA to take into consideration the ability for a DV offender to reoffend and cause sufficient harm to their family and society. (ABC,2015) Also showing how/why the FCA is only moderately effective in upholding CROC because in this case the “best interest” of the child was put secondary to the right of the parent. Proving that it is only moderately effective in the achievement of just outcomes for family and society due to the gaps in the legal systems enforcement that need to be addressed. Fantastic use of evidence and arguments in this paragraph, good work.
In addition, government responses, have taken steps towards the reduction of DV rates, in the Turnbull government attempting to change the national culture to make disrespecting women and children unacceptable(ABC,2015) . This push for change follows the 63 deaths in 2015 as a result of DV(ABC,2015) .Following their aim to make it a “national objective to ensure Australia is more respecting of women” as it has been “ignored for far too long and we must have a zero tolerance for it” (PM Malcolm Turnbull unveils $100 million package to fight domestic violence, ABC, 25 September 2015). In doing so the government has increased resources such as GPS panic buttons for victims and educational resources to changes attitudes of DV by elevating the issue to a national knowledge in its unacceptability. Though this is all being implemented it has yet to prove effective in means of reducing DV and further enforcement is needed to protect victims and achieve justice for families. Good paragraph, good arguments, but I feel this feels a little out of place as a paragraph. Perhaps you could expand it to include other initiatives/strategies, or expand on these ones more? Just feels short.
Moreover, the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) was amended in 1995 to remove the requirement that previously needed a person to “reasonably” fear for their safety, and to include controlling behaviour. However with cases such as R v Gittany [2013] NSWSC 1503 and R v Mulvihill [2014] NSWSC 443, both involving the murder through the cause of domestic violence. Proven that these measure have been largely ineffective in the protection and achievement of just outcomes for the victims and general society. Ditto with this paragraph - Too short. Feels very out of place, there isn't a fully formed argument. I'd merge this somewhere else.
In contrast, the non legal mechanism, Rosie Batty’s iMatter App was developed to help young women recognise the abusive and controlling warning signs of a potential DV relationship. (Doncare, 2017) Judgement? Created by Rosie Batty in the wake of the murder of her son, at the hands of her husband. It aims to promote positive self esteem for women, as well as to educate about disrespect and intimate partner violence. (Doncare, 2017) Don't tell me what the measure does, that isn't super important - Get to your judgements immediately. With the aim of promoting conversations about healthy relationship behaviour, raising awareness about DV. (Doncare, 2017) Though this non legal mechanism is only mildly effective, as it can help individuals realise the signs of a DV relationship, it can’t physically give them any protection or hold any legal power to interfere. You've made a judgement at the end here, but you've not delved into it or expanded on it in any way. Definitely not as strong as prior paragraphs.
Further, NGO’s are another mechanism of non-legal responses in achieving justice for DV, which are non government groups. Judgement? NGOs are groups who lobby for change, attempt to promote issues of DV and compile reports. Don't need to explain what NGO's are. They concern themselves with the spreading of awareness and pressure on the government. One example of a NGO is the White Ribbon campaign, which through primary prevention initiatives involving awareness raising and educational programs with youth, schools and workplaces attempts to aid in the reducement of DV. (White Ribbon Australia, 2017) Through promotional material White Ribbon constantly reminds society about the prevalence of DV and encourages people to band together in pushing for change. Though it is effective in promotion, though with a lack of support and ability to have any say in the changing of laws, the NGO proves ineffective in achieving just outcomes for families and society. Again, the judgement is a bit of an afterthought in this paragraph. You could perhaps link this paragraph and the last to make it stronger.
Another non legal measure is the media, and it is known to have immense impacts on the opinions, values and views of the society. Immensely good or bad?
Make your judgements clear and explicit! This allows the media to raise public awareness of DV and of any concerns arising around the issue. The media can also desensitise the issue of DV and have an adverse effect if too much coverage of this issue is presented before the community. Thus effecting law reform which only comes about if it is seen as an important issue in the eyes of the community. The media is a moderately effective non legal tool as it can raise awareness but holds the ability to halt or limit the ability for reform on the issue.
Therefore, legal and nonlegal measure in response to dealing with DV, are proved moderately effective. With each measure respectively, having its benefits but also its limits in producing just outcomes for families and the wider community. Though the issue of DV has a wide range of mechanisms that aid in its elimination most of these responses still prove only to a limited extent effective, in achieving justice for all. I think this conclusion does the job! Restates your argument succinctly and links back to the question :)
Strong essay Kirri, good work - Love your use of evidence and the focus on your argument in early paragraphs. It drops off as soon as you go to Non Legal Responses though, watch for that! Also be sure you start every paragraph with some sort of judgement and link to the question ("_________ are extremely effective in achieving justice in terms of DV.").
The big thing for you to watch is expression. I'm doing a lot of work to piece together your arguments myself, because the sentences don't flow neatly into one another - I've indicated a few places where this is obvious but it is an issue through pretty much your whole essay. You are ending a sentence, then continuing with the same thought without linking it together properly. It's a secondary issue to evidence and such, but your evidence is great, so focusing on the expression should be your priority :)
Hope this helps! ;D
Hello everyone! This is my Family Law Speech, if anyone has time to mark it, it would be really awesome! Thanks! :)
Hi there i would love a perfect Legal Studies structure thanks.
Hi everyone!
I have a family law essay due on Thursday and I was wondering if someone could take and give me so feedback on what I've written. In writing it you need to have referred to one contemporary issue and I chose the recognition of same-sex couples. This is the question: Evaluate the responsiveness of the law in achieving justice for family members I'm real sorry in advance for how long it is, it's meant to be 1200 words. Thank you so much!
Hi Jamon, sorry for the late message.
Could you please have a look at my essay when you are free and provide feedback and perhaps even an estimated mark?
I only did 2 paragraphs to divide into domestic legal and non-legal as the teacher didn't want separate international paragraphs for this essay.
Thank you :)
Hi everyone!
I have a family law essay due on Thursday and I was wondering if someone could take and give me so feedback on what I've written. In writing it you need to have referred to one contemporary issue and I chose the recognition of same-sex couples. This is the question --- I'm real sorry in advance for how long it is, it's meant to be 1200 words. Thank you so much!
Ok, thanks Wales. Do the 'posts' have to be giving others advice or can I just ask questions when I need help too?
Hey Maria! I can definitely give you some feedback on this, your essay is attached in the spoiler with comments in bold! ;DEssay with FeedbackEvaluate the responsiveness of the law in achieving justice for family members.
The responsiveness of the law in achieving justice for all family members in regards to the recognition of same sex couples has been fairly responsive. Good intro, makes the judgement clear straight away. You could try leading into it a bit more, why is recognition of same sex couples important in the legal system, perhaps? The concept of family law, by nature, is complex and continually evolving and thus the area of family law must be malleable and dynamic in response to allow justice to be afforded for all members of a family. This would make more sense going before the last sentence, perhaps, works well though! In the instance of recognising same-sex couples and families, the Australian legal system has made significant progress in ensuring that their rights are kept consistent with that of their heterosexual counterparts. However, the law’s denial of marital status to same-sex couples significantly limits its responsiveness in achieving justice for family members. Good introduction - Simple, gets the job done.
Over the past thirty years, the law has made significant changes in legally recognising same sex couples. Do you mean specifically legislation? Try to not use the word 'law' because that is quite a broad thing. These changes were exemplified through the The Property (Relationships) Act 1984 (NSW) which officially established de-facto couples as having the same legal standing as married couples in regards to areas which were previously overlooked such as inheritance and property division in the event of death or illness. Same-sex couples were excluded from the entitlements of this law as the legal system was yet to recognise them as legitimate couples. In the case of Howard v Andrews (1996)a man was unable to claim the property of his deceased male partner due to the nature of inheritance laws in currently in place. The law in turn responded to this institutionalised discrimination as demonstrated by the Property (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999 (NSW) which saw not only the extension of property and inheritance rights to same-sex couples but also introduced a definition of de-facto as “two adult persons living together as a couple who are not married or related by marriage”. Excellent analysis of a law, a case which raised an issue with the law, and a change. However, it could be more succinct to allow you to squeeze in more examples. You don't really need to spend a whole sentence or two explaining and describing the initial legislation, for example. Changes such as these exemplify how the role of law reform is pivotal in achieving just outcomes for family members. Legislative changes such as this became the catalyst for effective responses from the law in achieving justice for family members. Good paragraph, but needs more evaluation. You've presented a change, how effective is it? How responsive was it?
The constantly changing nature of family law calls for dynamic and effective responses from the law with issues that arise concerning children in same-sex partnerships. In today’s society, the idea of the family unit is incredibly different to the typical image of the nuclear family and the law has attempted to be responsive in recognising this change. Good context to the changes you will discuss. Previous to the Adoption Amendment (Same sex couples) Act 2010 NSW, same-sex couples were denied the right to legally adopt children within the state of New South Wales. This would bare many implications for same-sex families as seen within the case of AA v The Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages where a child born to a lesbian couple through means of artificial insemination was not able to have the name of both female parents on their birth certificate. Be sure to link this (very good) evidence to your argument. This is showing ineffectiveness and the fact that the law was 'initially' unresponsive to the issue. However since the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—General Law Reform) Act 2008,, the law responded to existing prejudices within commonwealth programs and laws that involve child support, medicare, adoption which in turn granted the couple the right to put the names of both females on the certificate without that of a biological father. How effective was this change? This is an 'evaluate' question so you need to be making judgements frequently! Societies change in values have also seen the law to be more inclined to consider the best interests of a child before that of its institutionalised prejudices. The Sydney Morning Herald article titled “Adoption by same-sex couple opposed because of birth parents’ Catholic faith” details a case where a court has “allowed a four-year old girl to be adopted by a same-sex couple despite her birth parents’ opposition”. The birth mother, since having a long history of drug use and a conviction for the manslaughter of her infant son, was deemed unfit to raise her child and therefore had her parental rights removed in regards to making decisions for her daughter's best interests. Try to make the case details a little more succinct, blend those two sentences into one - Save yourself some space, case details aren't super important. By acknowledging the best interests of the child within this ruling, Australia has complied with its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of a Child and exemplified how the law has the potential to be incredibly responsive in achieving justice for same-sex parented family members. Great. Same-sex couples now enjoy the same parental and adoption rights as their heterosexual counterparts and the significant responsiveness of the law has been instrumental in achieving this outcome. Great paragraph, good mix of evidence. I think this works really well!
Although the law has strived to recognise same-sex partnerships, the Australian legal system has yet been to completely afford justice to same-sex family members due to the lack of responsiveness in regards to the right to the right of marriage. The Marriage Act 1961 defines marriage as a union between a man and woman voluntarily entered into for life thus reflecting the views of Australian society at the time. However, the Marriage Amendment Act 2004 reaffirmed this heterosexual defintion “to the exclusion of all others” and also rendered same-sex unions solemnised overseas unable to be recognised as a marriage within Australia. Again, be sure to link this evidence to your argument. Make a judgement. I should be seeing the words 'effectively' and 'ineffectively' quite frequently. In contemporary Australian society, it is evident that attitudes and tolerance towards same-sex couples do not align with the definition that is outlined in the Marriage Act. According to the ABC article “7 Things Vote Compass reveals about Australians” ,published in June 2016,, more than “half of Australians support same sex marriage” with only “1 in 4 Australians agreeing with the statement that marriage should be between a man and woman”. Good use of media, I like that you are actually putting media to effective use in building your argument. In attempting to respond to the antiquated definition of marriage that the Act contains, the Australian Capital Territory legislated the Marriage Equality Act 2013 to cease the institutionalised discrimination against same-sex couples within the government. The High Court of Australia ruled that the Marriage Act already included an adequate and comprehensive definition of marriage and the enactment of this law could not exist concurrently with the definition under the Marriage Act. However the ruling from The Commonwealth of Australia v The Australian Capital Territory (2013), “held that the federal Parliament has power under the Australian constitution to legislate in respect to same sex marriage...and that under the constitution, whether same sex marriage should be provided for by law is a matter for federal Parliament” Fantastic situation to analyse here, but again, try and get it done more quickly. Recounting the series of events isn't as important as referencing the saga as a whole and analysing it for your argument. Give just enough for your argument to make sense. Therefore it is clear that the government has the potential means to rectify this contemporary issue but still chooses to impede on the rights of Australians in the denial of marital status to same-sex couples. Thus demonstrating poor responsiveness - Make your judgements! This bears many social implications such as the impression that same-sex couples are somehow secondary to that of their heterosexual counterparts. The law’s blatant lack of responsiveness concerning this issue poses as a significant hindrance in affording justice to members of same-sex families.
The law has been fairly responsive in recognising same-sex couples within Australia and in turn achieving justice for family members. Various changes to legislations and commonwealth programs throughout the years has meant that heterosexual couples and same-sex couples within contemporary Australian society enjoy many of the same rights. Within this judgement, there is clear distinction in the legitimacy of same-sex couples within the government in the denial to marital status. Thus the law is responsive in dealing with the many issues that arise concerning the recognition of same-sex couples however justice can never be truly be afforded to family members until this underlying prejudice is removed. Good conclusion, works really well to summarise your argument!
Not a whole lot of comments Maria, this works really well! My main piece of feedback would be to make sure you are constantly evaluating, saying "This is good," or "This is bad." You are presenting great evidence and have solid arguments, but just need you to bring it all together a bit better by saying, "So, clearly, the law is shit," or "... thus demonstrating an effective response to changing social values."
Minor criticism, I think this essay will do really well ;D
Hey Jamon! Thanks so much for taking the time to do this! I incorporated all the feedback you gave me last night into my response and I submitted it this morning! I really appreciate it!
Hi
I was wondering if you could please provide me feedback on my first 25 makrer essay of family law?
I was also wondering if you could help me
- in my last paragraph for cases and legislation
- how to write an introduction. ( i wrote my body paragraphs but i dont really know how to structure an introduction and conclusion)
Thank you so so so so much :) :) :)
EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE LAW IN ACHIEVING JUSTICE FOR PARTIES IN RELATIONSHIP BREAKDOWNS
basically these are my body paragraphs as i dont really know what to write in an introduction and conclusion
The law has been significantlyI was told not to use high modality words unless you can support it. Maybe take out significant as there are always downsides to law reforms effective in achieving justice for the parties [KS1] of a marriage when their marriage breaks down as society changes and divorce has become more acceptable. The removal of “fault” as the ground for divorce in the Family Law Act 1975, allowed for a more acrimonious approach to divorce in addition to divorce application to quicker and more cost and time efficient as well as meeting the societal values as well as How does it meet societal values? You've also used as well as twice in a sentence. I would recommend "In addition to the divorce appliation being quicker and more cost efficient it also meets societal values as it doesn't tarnish ..."achieving just outcome for both parties in the marriage as it doesn’t tarnish the reputation of the other spouse when proving fault. Online application have been introduced to to reflect the technological change society undergoesEffect? What does online application make easier?. Despite the ease to apply for a divorce, the rate of divorces has gone down as in 2001 approximately 55000 divorces were granted in comparison to the 49000 divorces in 2011 according to ABS. This shows how despite the law making divorce more accessible to it doesn’t compromise with the definition of marriage. You might want to address ineffectiveness here as well. You should always look at both sides the effects of a given legislation.
When parties are involved in a relationship breakdown, the divison of property is the most contentious issues. The law encourages parties to comply and co-operate with each otherHow? whichdoes achieveachieves justice for the separating parties. The law encourages couples to mutually reach an agreements on the allocation of property through avenues such as Relationship centres Good stuff!which can then be made binding by applying to the family court if the court deems the division to be fair and equitable. Furthermore, the law encompasses for both married and de facto couples and for bothWording seems a bit awkward. Maybe for both married and de facto couples to apply for property allocation instead. circumstances allows the court to allocate property if the couple disputes. The courts take into account factors such as the financial and non-financial contribution of each party in addition to their financial commitments, income, if they have the care of anyone under 18 years of age, ability to maintain a reasonable standard of living and the contributions made to assets You should end the sentence here and introduce the case in a new sentence.as depicted in C & M (2006) where the wife’s contribution were recognizesd in the division of property. The 2002 reforms to the Family Law Act has allowed to claim super that each spouse has accumulated. While this is beneficial for those spouses who don’t work, or are in less secured positions it reduces overall justice for spouse who’s superannuation is being dividedHow does it reduce justice? Who is impacted? How are they impacted?. The law has undergone amendment to recognize Pre-nuptials as binding agreements in the Family Courts which preserves justice as for both individuals to have their properties protected in a mutual deal made rationally by both parties which can be challenged in court if the party deems it to be What is the effect of introducing the mutual deal? Who does it create justice for?. Hence the law has been significantly effective in upholding justice for the parties of the relationship when dividing property once the relationship has broken down.
You may want to address the ineffectiveness of the law here again.
The law is vastly effective when achieving justice for children when parents apply for the divorce as the best interest of the child are the primarily concern of the lawI would have a topic sentence then introduce the specific reform (CROC I think it was) that introduced the best interests of the child. Under part VII of the Family law Act 1975 (CTH) an application for divorce won't be approved unless a parenting plan has been put in placeWhat does a parenting plan do in terms of achieving justice? Who does it affect primarily?. The Child Support Scheme has been implemented to ensure that children are financially secure. However, figures show that only half of payers fully meet their obligationsI think you can join that sentence with the previous. Expand on the ineffectiveness here as well.. Hence the 2006 amendment has allowed the payer’s wage to be garnished if they don’t comply and meet their financial obligation for the child. Furthermore, the law in the 2011 amendment of the Family Law ActCite the law properly :) The 2011 Amendment to the FLA, has allowed children to maintain a meaningful relationship with both parents where the quality of time is valued rather than the quantity of the timeWhat did the law change to allow this? in response to Rosa v Rosa where the mother had to leave in poor conditions for the child to maintain a relationship with the father. However the impractical lifestyle she maintained wasn’t in the best interest of the child hence catalyzing law reform to remove the vagueness surrounding the law and ensuring CROC is upheld the best interests of the child Introduce CROC earlier.is given more stance than the parental relationships. The law has reformed having extended to include ex-nuptial children thus being applicable to all children. Hence, the law effectively achieves justice for children when relationships breakdown as law’s primary concern is the best interest of the child.
Mediation and counselling has been incorporated in the law and is provided to couples aiming to ensure amicable decisions regarding separation are made. The family Law Act has placed an emphasis on mediation and counselling as a primary dispute resolution, encouraging cooperation between couples as dispute resolutionHow? Which reform did this. I would also back it up with statistics!. It is compulsory for disputing couples to attend family counselling sessions unless there is danger to a spouse or an ADVO has been carried outIneffectiveness here could be ADVO's not preventing the perpetrator of DV. Plenty of cases for that: Jean Majdalawi. Darcey Freeman etc.. The law aims to resolve disputes without arbitration which in addition to being beneficial for society it also benefits the couple being cost efficientand allows financially disadvantaged people access to the law. Mediation and counselling heavily relies on compliance and cooperation between couples and without so it can be ineffectiveWhy? Is it because of tensions between the individuals? How does the law address this.. Furthermore, the law requires that couples with marriage sunder 2 years to attend compulsory counselling aiming to uphold the definition of marriage and provide resolutions to young couples.What does this do? How does it create justice for the individuals HenceMaybe it's just me but you've used hence a lot ): Try cut it down the law has been effective in encouraging mediation and counselling however its success relies on the cooperation between the parties when breaking down a relationship
Hi
I was wondering if you could please provide me feedback on my first 25 makrer essay of family law?
I was also wondering if you could help me
- in my last paragraph for cases and legislation
- how to write an introduction. ( i wrote my body paragraphs but i dont really know how to structure an introduction and conclusion)
Thank you so so so so much :) :) :)
Hey kiaaa! Wales has given great feedback above, I'll add mine over the weekend ;D
Hi
I was wondering if you could please provide me feedback on my first 25 makrer essay of family law?
I was also wondering if you could help me
- in my last paragraph for cases and legislation
- how to write an introduction. ( i wrote my body paragraphs but i dont really know how to structure an introduction and conclusion)
Thank you so so so so much :) :) :)
I hope the feedback helped! I'm not a experienced marker ( student myself ) and thought I would lend a hand since the markers are rather busy.
I've attached the feedback in bold. Just read the quote and you should see it :)
I feel that a lot of your sentence structure isn't cohesive enough, ideas don't flow well from one to another. I think it's primarily because of your excessive use of conjunctions ( ____ hence it shows ___ and therefore ___ hence justice ). You have the right ideas but you need to judge both sides of reforms.
The conclusion should be a summation of your arguments and your judgement. Has it been effective? If so, for who and ineffective for who? For your introduction I would also include your judgement and provide a definition for family law/areas you're going to talk about. Just brief and nothing too long.
Goodluck! I'm glad to answer any questions you've got.
Regards, Wales
Hey! Sorry this took a while, hopefully this feedback helps! :)Essay with FeedbackEVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE LAW IN ACHIEVING JUSTICE FOR PARTIES IN RELATIONSHIP BREAKDOWNS
The law has been significantly effective in achieving justice for the parties [KS1] of a marriage when their marriage breaks down as society changes and divorce has become more acceptable. Good start, having a little justification of the increased prevalence of divorce works well here. Sets up your judgement well. The removal of “fault” as the ground for divorce in the Family Law Act 1975, allowed for a more acrimonious approach to divorce in addition to divorce application to quicker and more cost and time efficient as well as meeting the societal values as well as achieving just outcome for both parties in the marriage as it doesn’t tarnish the reputation of the other spouse when proving fault. This sentence definitely flows on a little long, I'd cut it in half to make sure the ideas are expressed properly. Online application have been introduced to to reflect the technological change society undergoes. Watch syntax, applicationS! However, nice point. Good to see you being specific with how you analyse effectiveness and responses to change. Despite the ease to apply for a divorce, the rate of divorces has gone down as in 2001 approximately 55000 divorces were granted in comparison to the 49000 divorces in 2011 according to ABS. Again, I think this could be expressed more effectively and more succinctly. Even just, According to the ABS, the rate of divorces reduced from 55,000 to 49,000 from 2001 to 2011. This shows how despite the law making divorce more accessible to it doesn’t compromise with the definition of marriage. Not quite sure if this last sentence is a valid flow on from your argument, the 'definition' of marriage isn't quite up for debate here. I get it, but not quite expressed properly, perhaps you could link the reduced divorce rates to the effectiveness of mediation and other measures intended to prevent the breakdown of a marriage?
When parties are involved in a relationship breakdown, the division of property is the most contentious issues. The law encourages parties to comply and co-operate with each other which does achieve justice for the separating parties. How effectively? Be sure to make a clear and obvious judgement in your response. The law encourages couples to mutually reach an agreements on the allocation of property through avenues such as Relationship centres which can then be made binding by applying to the family court if the court deems the division to be fair and equitable. Again, ensure ideas are expressed clearly: Add commas to break ideas into manageable chunks where necessary! Furthermore, the law encompasses for both married and de facto couples and for both circumstances allows the court to allocate property if the couple disputes. Good - Be specific that this shows effectiveness! Also, try and include the specific law that accomplishes this. Specific evidence is always better than sweeping statements. The courts take into account factors such as the financial and non-financial contribution of each party in addition to their financial commitments, income, if they have the care of anyone under 18 years of age, ability to maintain a reasonable standard of living and the contributions made to assets as depicted in C & M (2006) where the wife’s contribution were recognized in the division of property. I'd separate this into a setup sentence, then bring the case in with a second sentence. It's too much doing it all in one. Further, I don't think you need to list the considerations, I'd spend that space on analysing the case more specifically. The 2002 reforms to the Family Law Act has allowed to claim super that each spouse has accumulated. While this is beneficial for those spouses who don’t work, or are in less secured positions it reduces overall justice for spouse who’s superannuation is being divided. Interesting analysis! The law has undergone amendment to recognize Pre-nuptials as binding agreements in the Family Courts which preserve justice as for both individuals to have their properties protected in a mutual deal made rationally by both parties which can be challenged in court if the party deems it to be. Hence the law has been significantly effective in upholding justice for the parties of the relationship when dividing property once the relationship has broken down. A solid paragraph analytically, it does feel a bit like a big jumble of unrelated evidence though. Try and use linking words to move logically from one piece of evidence to the next.
The law is vastly effective when achieving justice for children when parents apply for the divorce as the best interest of the child are the primarily concern of the law. Watch expression, primarily should be 'primary,' and I'd choose a different word than 'vastly,' that's more a size/scope word rather than an evaluative word. Under part VII of the Family law Act 1975 (CTH) an application for divorce won't be approved unless a parenting plan has been put in place. The Child Support Scheme has been implemented to ensure that children are financially secure. How effective is it? What law implemented it? These are the sorts of specifics I need. However, figures show that only half of payers fully meet their obligations. Hence the 2006 amendment has allowed the payer’s wage to be garnished if they don’t comply and meet their financial obligation for the child. Is this effective in achieving justice for children? Keep linking back to your argument! Furthermore, the law in the 2011 amendment of the Family Law Act, has allowed children to maintain a meaningful relationship with both parents where the quality of time is valued rather than the quantity of the time in response to Rosa v Rosa where the mother had to leave in poor conditions for the child to maintain a relationship with the father. Too much in one sentence - Further, try and use the formal way of writing the legislation. However the impractical lifestyle she maintained wasn’t in the best interest of the child hence catalyzing law reform to remove the vagueness surrounding the law and ensuring CROC is upheld the best interests of the child is given more stance than the parental relationships. Not quite sure what you are arguing here - Keep it simple. I feel like you are trying to do too much too quickly. The law has reformed having extended to include ex-nuptial children thus being applicable to all children. Hence, the law effectively achieves justice for children when relationships breakdown as law’s primary concern is the best interest of the child.
Mediation and counselling has been incorporated in the law and is provided to couples aiming to ensure amicable decisions regarding separation are made. Good/bad/ugly? Make your judgement at the start of your Thesis! The family Law Act has placed an emphasis on mediation and counselling as a primary dispute resolution, encouraging cooperation between couples as dispute resolution. It is compulsory for disputing couples to attend family counselling sessions unless there is danger to a spouse or an ADVO has been carried out. The law aims to resolve disputes without arbitration which in addition to being beneficial for society it also benefits the couple being cost efficient. Good, watch expression, something like ... "The law aims to resolve disputes without arbitration, with mediation/counselling proving more cost efficient than court proceedings." Mediation and counselling heavily relies on compliance and cooperation between couples and without so it can be ineffective. Furthermore, the law requires that couples with marriage sunder 2 years to attend compulsory counselling aiming to uphold the definition of marriage and provide resolutions to young couples. Be careful not to start just listing measures. Evaluate them - Are they effective? If so why? If not, why? Hence the law has been effective in encouraging mediation and counselling however its success relies on the cooperation between the parties when breaking down a relationship
Throughout your response, I think tidying up your expression will help a lot. A bit of unnecessary info, lots of ways to express answers more succinctly - At times I had to work quite hard to put your arguments together in my head. You don't want a HSC marker needing to do that work! ;D
Besides that, more evidence would be welcome. More obvious judgements would be welcome too. But fixing expression is something you should spend some time working on, to really make sure your ideas can be expressed properly! ;D
For your introduction, try this Legal Studies Thesis Guide! It goes through how to set up your argument correctly, as well as paragraph structure and such.
This HSC essay guide might also help ;D
thank you soo much Wales and Jamon. Seriously you guys are legends! :) I was wondering if you would be able to give me a guide on about what band this essay would receive please? just so i know where i broadly lie
Thanks once again :))
- Hi there this is my world order essay it is not finished yet a few more paragraphs but i just want know how it looks so far , and we had to pick one question out of three questions and I've picked ''Explain the impact of the media on world order" i would love some feedback thank you and this is due next term.
Hello hello helloo
I have written an essay on family law and was wondering if you could please mark it for me and provide me feedback please? I was also wondering if you could provide me an indication at the end around what mark it would receive in an exam and if there are any areas i really need to address and improve
thank you very much! :)
Hi there this is my completed body paragraphs on my world order essay but i have not completed my conclusion, and my question is- explain the impact of the media on world order i would love some feedback thank.
Hello hello helloooo ;D happy to! Essay is attached with feedback in bold:SpoilerEvaluate the effectiveness of the law in protecting victims of domestic violence
Domestic Violence is violence within long intimate relationships and is considered a crime under s11 of the Crimes (Domestic and personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW). Good start, but generally you don't need to define terms in this way for Legal! Your markers know what it is. Definitely not bad, but perhaps less useful than starting with your judgement. The law has recognized domestic violence as an issue within itself and hence made legislative changes in address the issue due the alarming increase in cases relating domestic violence. The introduction of Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders branching from Apprehended Violence orders, in addition to criminal charges and family court orders display the legal systems attempt to better protect victims of domestic violence through various mechanisms. The law’s moderate effectiveness is demonstrated through the mechanisms having numerous shortfalls which fail to protect the victim thus not achieving the law’s initial purpose. Overall a solid introduction, but the judgement doesn't come in until right at the end - I think it would work better introducing it a little earlier and delving in a little deep!
The law is partially effective in protecting domestic violence victims by introducing Apprehended Domestic Violence orders(ADVO), stemming from Apprehended Violence Orders (AVO) carrying the purpose to protect the victim from assault, intimidation or abuse of any sort. A little expression/tense issue there I think? Good start though, makes judgement obvious immediately. Under the Crimes (Domestic Violence) Amendment Act 1982 (NSW) the victim is required to prove on the balance of probabilities that on reasonable grounds they fear for their for personal violence, intimidation or assault placing the onus upon the victim which can act as a barrier in proving domestic violence. Police can issue interim ADVO’s over the phone from a magistrate if they are satisfied the person seeking the order is at risk of harm thus allowing easy accessibility for victims displaying the law’s effectiveness in protecting victims . Good! Included an evaluation with the content - This is exactly what you need to do. However as intensive policing isn’t available, ADVO’s rely on the victims to report any breaches thus is heavily reliant on the defendant to comply with the order. Relate this specifically to ineffectiveness - Be super obvious with your judgements. Offenders that are found breeching their ADVO’s can find their bail application being denied under the s9A of the Bail Act to prevent the offender from causing further harm to the victim, a reform coming through the murder of Andrea Patrick who was murdered after her spouse was out on bail after being issued an ADVO. Be careful you don't start regurgitating cases and knowledge - Make judgements everywhere. Did this change to the Bail Act see an improvement? Make it worse? According to the 2015 BOSCAR report, 98% of women who experienced domestic violence no longer did after issuing an ADVO which displays state law’s effectiveness in protecting domestic violence. Effectiveness of ADVO's specifically I'd say - Excellent statistic. However, the ineffectiveness of the law is demonstrated as ADVO’s are a state government issue therefore if the perpetrator leaves the state the order won't be applicable. The federal government in response is in the process of introducing a national ADVO system where “ if women and children receive a court order to protect them in one state it should protect them in all states” Tony Abbot (National Domestic Violence Orders would leave perpetrators nowhere to hide)(ABC) 2014. Excellent argument, and a great quote. While the law has many strategies emplaced to protect victims, it contains numerous loopholes which compromise with the laws effectiveness in protecting victims. Overall, an effective paragraph. Good evidence, I'd like you to link more specifically to your judgements, and delve into the 'loopholes' a little more if you can.
The law is moderately effective in protecting victims of domestic violence through criminal charges having police apply for an ADVO on the victim’s behalf if an offence is committed and recorded as a domestic violence offence. Another ADVO paragraph, I feel like this blends too similarly to the previous? Governed by the Crimes (domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), the strengths of a criminal charge lie that the victim if does face domestic violence and is unwilling to report as are many cases, the police can intervene and take action to protect the victim from further harm and not label domestic violence as a personal issue. Not 100% sure what you mean here. Having the law broaden the definition of domestic violence, it incorporates numerous offences such as placing financial constraints or emotional abuse hence allowing victims to be easily protected under the law. Good.However, the short falls within the law are demonstrated as criminal charges have a high standard of proof being ‘beyond reasonable doubt.’ While this ensures justice to society that only the perpetrator receives charge, the high standard can make it difficult for the victim to prove than an ADVO. Watch for expression issues. Furthermore, the severe outcome of having a criminal conviction can deter police and victims to pursue the charges. Therefore, criminal charges adequately protect the domestic violence victims, however, the law does contain aspects where shortfalls lie. Definitely not as solid as your previous paragraph, and again feel that you've argued the positives more effectively than the negatives (the balance is better in this paragraph than last).
Family court orders as an element of the law have limited effectiveness in protecting domestic violence victims. Great start. Clear and to the point. Under the Family Law Act 1975, a victim can seek for orders similar to an ADVO as an injunction or parenting orders. The court orders acknowledge violence to be part of a larger family problem and subsequently can order an injunction which can prevent or make an individual to do something. Watch for regurgitating content, the markers know this already! You've not evaluated, just stated. The law’s weakness however lies in that it operates the same as an AVO but is more difficult to enforce displaying obsolete laws within the legal system. Be specific, what do you mean by 'the law' here, still the orders? Furthermore, an order in comparison to an ADVO, is harder to obtain displaying the lack of accessibility for domestic violence victims. Good. Court orders also consist of parenting orders which recognized the effects of family violence upon children. The Family Court is required to ensure that the orders made about the child’s future are in the best interest of the child, upholding Australia’s international obligation towards the Convention of the Rights of the Child. Does it do this effectively? Ineffectively? Make the judgement! However, in fear of the negative response from the Family Court when applying for parenting orders, women maybe reluctant to raise issues of family violence. This highlights a great ineffectiveness of the law as 61% of abused women have a child in their care which demonstrates the laws inability to protect women and children who are victims of domestic violence. Thus, the law is highly ineffective in protecting domestic violence victims through the use of court orders.
Hence, the law is relatively effective through the implementation of ADVOs, ability to lay criminal charges and to seek family court orders. Yet, there aspects where the law does contain loopholes which can compromise the domestic violence victim’s safety thus reducing the laws effectiveness to achieve its desired purpose.
Comments:
- Excellent variety of evidence, like that you've found statistics, used treaties and included quotes from media articles. You've done your research. Excellent work.
- Judgement is established and concluded clearly, and in most parts of your essay is linked to the evidence reasonably well. Still room for improvement here - Ensure every piece of evidence is used to say whether the ADVO/Family Court/criminal charge, etc, is effective or ineffective. If you don't it is a useless bit of info!
- Watch for small sections where you regurgitate content - That is a waste of space :)
- Since you have a balanced judgement, I'd like some more evidence for ineffectiveness, if you can find it!
I think you are sitting in the high Band 5 range right now - To elevate to Band 6, just improving your links to argument (and smaller changes I've detailed in the comments throughout) should get you there! Very, very close - This is an excellent response kiiaaa, great work ;D
Hey, I was wondering if you could please have a read through these two essays that I've been give as practice for my trial exam. They are written around the same ideas, I've just manipulate the argument to best suit the question. My biggest concern is that I am not discussing points relevant to the question at hand and my teacher refuses to give me any feedback. I am also concerned as to whether there is enough supporting evidence. Thank you :)
Hey Claudia! I've put your first essay on the marking list, but you'll need 30 posts before your second one qualifies!! ;D
HiJamon, I've just reached 30 posts, am I required to re-post the essay? Also big thanks for taking the time to mark these essay! It's big help :D
Hey are markers looking for a really sophisticated response or just by you answering the question in a really simple form
Hey, I was wondering if you could please have a read through these two essays that I've been give as practice for my trial exam. They are written around the same ideas, I've just manipulate the argument to best suit the question. My biggest concern is that I am not discussing points relevant to the question at hand and my teacher refuses to give me any feedback. I am also concerned as to whether there is enough supporting evidence. Thank you :)
Could I please have feedback for this crime essay? It is not written for the HSC but was an internal assignment so i am aware that it is far too long for the HSC but I'd like to know where I'm strong and where Im weaker. Thank you!!
ThanksSpoilerBroad sentencing discretion is central to the ability of the criminal courts to ensure justice is done in all the extraordinary variety of circumstances of individual offences and individual offenders.
— Chief Justice Spigelman
With reference to the quote, evaluate the effectiveness of sentencing and punishment as a means of achieving justice.
Achieving justice demands a careful balancing act between the interests of the community, the concerns of the victim, and the best interests of the offender. Thus, flexibility and discretion in sentencing and punishment is critical to ensuring justice is done.
Guideline sentencing effectively balances the interests of the community, the concerns of the victim, and the rights of the offender, informing the exercise of judicial discretion in the area of sentencing. Judicial guidelines derived from judgements decided on by the NSW Sentencing Council, such as the case R v Henry (1999), used for guilty pleas of armed robbery, ensures greater consistency and transparency in the way sentences are determined by judges. Statutory guidelines involve looking at acts of parliament such as the Crimes (Sentencing Procedures) Act 1999 NSW. Statutes enhance the integrity of the legal process, facilitating greater uniformity in dealing with the extraordinary variety of circumstances of individual offences. R v Jacobs (2013) was the first case to issue the mandatory life sentence for murder of an on-duty police officer, under the Crimes Amendment (Murder of Police Officers) Act 2011. Media coverage addressed concerns of whether rights of conflicting parties had been achieved; ‘Is a police man’s life worth more?’ SMH (2011). R v Loveridge (2013) was a catalyst for change and reform, introducing an 8 year mandatory sentences for those convicted of ‘One punch’ laws under the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Assault and Intoxication) Act 2014. Through reform, tougher laws have championed the interests of the community, bringing sentences more into line with community standards. However, this statute has hindered the effectiveness of the CJS to perform with discretion and independence, impeding upon the rights of the accused and undermining fundamental rule of law principles. Chief Justice Spigelman expressed a need for guidelines with broad, flexible scope, to provide structure for judicial discretion, promote consistency, and increase public confidence in sentencing; “Guideline judgments are a mechanism for structuring discretion, not for restricting discretion. The continued existence of sentencing discretion is an essential component of the fairness of our criminal justice system.”
An effective and just punishment for the individual and society is based upon a combination of the four purposes of punishment defined in the Crimes (Sentencing Procedures) Act 1999 NSW. Deterrence discourages certain behaviours by providing consequences. Specific deterrence refers to punishment of the individual to discourage recidivism. General deterrence refers to punishment setting an example for future offenders. A BOSCAR 2006 investigation accounted for 41% of released prisoners reoffending within three years. Thus, incarceration is ineffective as a specific deterrent, failing to break the cycle of recidivism. Retribution considers impact upon the victim, family, and community. Lengthy custodial sentences such as the doubling of Kieren Loveridge’s sentence on appeal, are an example of punishment aimed at retribution. Rehabilitation aims to reform the offender. This benefits the community by reducing the likelihood of recidivism. In looking at the high rate of recidivism within the first two years of conviction; 29% or 56% for young offenders, it is evident that justice is more likely to be achieved if rehabilitation is prioritised. Rehabilitation through the Drug Court effectively reduces recidivism by 37% (BOSCAR 2010). Conversely, rehabilitation is criticised for failing to adequately retribute those who have suffered. Although effective in ensuring society feels protected, incapacitation places financial stress on society at large, costing over $50 000/pa. Justice is not achieved in the long run as money would be more efficiently spent addressing underlying causes.
The balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors is integral towards achieving justice in sentencing. Aggravating factors increase criminal culpability. This allows cases where the offender has abused a position of authority, such as the John Ellis case where he was sexually abused as an altar boy, to be dealt with more severely. This reflects society’s heightened level of denunciation associated with these crimes. Mitigating factors reduce criminal culpability and consider circumstances which provide context to the crime. This enables broad sentencing discretion of subjective factors; character reference, prior conviction, guilty plea, assisting police, and honest display of remorse with prospects for rehabilitation.
Victims are guaranteed rights under the Victims Rights Act 1996. Victim Impact Statements (VIS) convey intimate insight to the impact of the offenders’ actions. This effectively facilitates access to just outcomes for those impacted, by compelling judicial discretion and possible aggravating factors such as in Aguirre v Regina (2010). An important case to look at in terms of the role of the victim is R v Loveridge (2014). The judge considered aggravating factors; violent nature, and mitigating factors; offender’s display of remorse, disadvantaged background. On appeal, the sentence was doubled to a non-parole period of 10 years, reflecting the need for retribution to ensure a just outcome for the victim. A media article ‘Thomas Kelly Death was Never Murder’ (SMH 2014), described this as “trial by media”. This case highlights the controversy surrounding VIS, as the CJS struggles to balance the demands from the victim, with just outcomes for the accused. As put by Justice Ron Howie, “Judges have to remind the public they do not sentence for the victim, but for the community.” Only then can justice be achieved on a more consistent basis.
Appeals are a means of ‘ensuring justice is done in all the extraordinary variety of circumstances of individual offences and individual offenders’. However, in the case R v AEM; KEM; MM (2002), the Crown appealed to the Criminal Court of Appeal against the leniency of a sentence given for a serious case of aggravated sexual assault in company. On appeal, the original sentences where more than doubled, from five and six, to 13 and 14 years’ imprisonment. Thus, ineffectiveness rises when there has been a failure to achieve justice the first time round, putting financial pressure on courts and being time consuming. Further ineffectiveness can be seen in R v Leung (2009, 2011 and 2013), where the defendant was tried three times for the same crime and was found not-guilty the first two times, wasting the CJS’s resources.
Penalties achieve justice by upholding community values and demonstrating enforcement of the law, and vary with respect to a judge’s discretion. Fines; (Section 17) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, are appropriate for strict liability or regulatory offences, resource-efficient, and raise revenue for governments to use in other areas. However as a ‘specific’ deterrent, fines disadvantage particular demographics, thus promoting institutionalised inequity. Furthermore, imprisonment accounts for a large portion of the CJS’s ineffectiveness. The NSW Department of Juvenile Justice spends 48% of their budget keeping young offenders in custody, but no link has been found with decreased recidivism. 27% of Australia’s prisoners are Indigenous, but Indigenous Australians make up only 3% of our total population. Therefore, the over-representation in Indigenous incarceration accounts for great ineffectiveness as “Nearly 20 years after a Royal Commission into black deaths in custody recommended jail be used as a last resort, the proportion of indigenous prisoners has doubled.” Locking Out Rehabilitation (SMH 2009).
In involving a wider spectrum of interested people into the decision-making process, diversionary programs are successful alternatives to traditional modes of sentencing. The Magistrate’s Early Referral into Treatment (MERIT) programme breaks the cycle of drug abuse and crime by addressing underlying mental health and social welfare issues. BOCSAR (2009) found that within 12 months, reoffending dropped from 49% to 35%. Conversely, the programme reduces personal accountability by focusing more on the causes of criminality rather than impacts. Circle sentencing is an alternative court for sentencing adult indigenous Australians where guilt is openly admitted. As making it meaningful by inviting community members and elders to take part in the sentencing process, recidivism rates and Aboriginal confidence in the criminal justice system improves. The Young Offenders Act 1997 allows referrals to Youth Justice Conferences. However, Dr Don Weatherburn indicated that this alternative is no more effective than the NSW Children’s Court in reducing juvenile recidivism; “Those who participate in YJC’s find the experience very rewarding, but we may need to look elsewhere for programs that reduce the risk of juvenile reoffending.” Ultimately, these alternative methods of sentencing are seen as coinciding, not replacing traditional forms of sentencing, and play a significant role in achieving greater equality, fairness and access within the sentencing and punishment process.
In assessing the implications of post-sentencing considerations in achieving justice, the consequences of these decisions must be examined. In Police v Power (2007), the protective custody of Patrick Power, deputy DPP of NSW, failed to serve justice. Having been found in possession of child pornography and sentenced 15 months, Power only served 8 as he had been responsible for putting some of his fellow inmates in prison. Preventative detention as seen with the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2016 NSW, issues police the ability to detain and question terror suspects for 14 days without charge. Although effective in protecting the community, the rights of the individual are undermined. Under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW), released sexual offenders against children are put on the Australian National Child Offender Register (ANCOR) for at least 8 years. Ineffectiveness is seen with the push to remove young offender ‘sexters’ from this list, as rehabilitation and reintegration into the community is the primary goal. This is seen in a media article from 2016; “Issues of sex-texting for your offenders under review”.
Sentencing and punishment emphasises the limitations in achieving a reasonable and effective balance between the rights of the suspects, the accused and the community. These examples reveal that when one person’s rights are respected, another’s are infringed upon. While to some extent balance is achieved, this balance is not always entirely effective.
Could I possibly have feedback for this essay? I posted it over a week ago and was just wondering if maybe it was missed? If its just because you are busy then dw and just whenever is fine
Heyy, I was wondering if I could get some feedback on this World Order essay?
Hey Claudia! I've attached both your essays with comments throughout in red (didn't want to confuse with your use of bold and underline) :)
ESSAY MARKING IN PROGRESS - 1/2 COMPLETE :)
1. DISCUSS THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE LAW REFLECTS MORAL AND ETHICAL STANDARDS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMSpoilerEnsuring the law is reflective of current moral and ethical standards is paramount in criminal justice system. Why is this? Seems a little like an incomplete thought. Whilst increasing communal emphasis has been placed upon the achievement of natural justice, in line with values of equity, increasing powers have been granted to law enforcement bodies in relation to move on orders, charge negotiation and DNA evidence, highlight the inherent difficulties in upholding both societal standards and safety. Slight expression issue in this second sentence - This introduction is a little short. It needs to be longer to properly link to the question and establish your argument!
Driven by ideological intentions, the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act NSW (2002) (LEPRA) has expanded police powers in the name of “public safety”, an attempt at upholding communal standards surrounding the prevention of criminal activity. I like this introduction - Introducing the law immediately works well here. However, by granting police the power to employ move on orders, the state have imposed serious constraints upon the individual's use of public spaces, unlawfully compromising one’s freedom to roam, and in turn breaching both essential international obligations under the Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 (UDHR) and universal equity ethics. Slight expression issue here - Be sure to link the argument explicitly to moral and ethical standards. In fact, with no offer for judicial review, essential safeguards have been removed and the most vulnerable members of society are being moved at a largely disproportionate rate in comparison to other community members [‘New Drunk, Disorderly Police Powers Penalise the Most Vulnerable’ (SMH: 23/9/14)]. Moreover, whilst introduced as a deterrent mechanism, the individual’s democratic right to protest peacefully is now dependent upon police discretion. ... Thus showing the ineffectiveness of the measures in upholding, blah blah blah. Be sure to link everything back to the extent to which the law reflects the standards. Serious human rights abuses and infringements by police are going unchallenged, diminishing moral justice standards, as evident during the Occupy Protests 2011, which brought otherwise law-abiding individuals into negative contact with the law. Influenced by the Commonwealth's radical anti-terrorism legislation, it is evident whilst introduced to maintain community safety, move on orders pre-emptively criminalise individuals without any proof of guilt, a feature of the criminal justice system that is clearly not in balance with current moral and ethical standards held by society. Fantastic finish to the paragraph, brought together nicely. The argument throughout was just a little shaky, at times I didn't quite see the connection between the evidence and the argument you were making. Overall though, nicely done!
With growing community recognition regarding the dangerously rapid evolving nature of forensic technology, a large amount of communal emphasis has been placed on government proactivity in relation to DNA evidence. Outlining the standards of DNA collection, the Crimes Amendment (Forensic Procedures) Act 2001 (CA) was passed to ensure forensic evidence is ethically obtained and free from interference, in line with social expectations. Good start, links to question and establishes the topic area and relevant legislation. Works well. However, although DNA has a powerful influence in achieving justice for both victims and the community, a naivety regarding its impact upon the accused rights has increased. Slight expression issue, I think 'developed' works better there than 'increased' as one idea on how to fix? By placing significant amounts of trust in DNA evidence, an over reliance upon its evidential accuracy has occurred, leading to serious miscarriages of justice, as seen in R v Jama (2008). With the absence of any other evidence despite DNA, the prosecution benefited from what has been dubbed as the ‘CSI effect’, with misinformed jurors placing immense amounts of weight upon forensic evidence. In fact, an SMH article titled “Wrongfully Accused” shed light upon the unethical nature of the criminal justice system as a whole, stating the trial judge, constrained by the rules of evidence, advised the jury “not to speculate” over the lack of sufficient evidence. The case of R v Jama was of paramount significance, sparking public controversy in relation to the immoral and unethical nature of the criminal trial process. Be careful - You've spent quite a few sentences discussing the details of this case and have really only linked back to standards ever so slightly in this last sentences. Don't fall into the trap of going into unnecessary detail for a case, just the bare essentials and a link to the argument, and move on, two sentences tops! In response, the nation's Attorney-general’s office implemented measures ensuring the ‘CSI effect’ no longer compromises the integrity and fairness of future criminal proceeding, both raising national DNA examination standards and addressing the potential for expert forensic evidence to be unjustly misunderstood. What were these measures specifically? It is evident that whilst the Commonwealth have taken notable strides towards ensuring communal ethical standards are being met, DNA evidence is often presented unfairly, and thus is use is not in line with moral standards of justice. You are bringing the judgement together really nicely at the end of your paragraphs. Try and thread it throughout as well - For this paragraph I also think reducing the focus on the case and bringing in other evidence would be beneficial.
Defined by the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 as an agreement between the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and an offender with respect to a guilty plea, charge negotiation has proven to have substantial communal benefits, reducing both the expenditure of resources in the criminal justice system and the lengthy nature of court proceedings. Be careful to make sure your topic sentences relate specifically to the question for maximum benefit! Highlighted by the Samuels Report into Charge Negotiation, guilty pleas serve as an effective means in minimising burden of criminal trials on taxpayers, saving $15 million each year since 2002, reflective of community attitudes regarding the use of public money. Nice, good link there - Not something I've seen before, clever! It can also be said that charge negotiation saves victims and witnesses from testifying, in line with growing moral recognition of the detrimental effects the adversarial system posses towards traumatised parties involved in serious crimes. Your links to the question are much better in this paragraph. However, an SMH articled titled ‘Victims Ignored in Plea Deals’ (2009) claimed many victims often feel cheated by the system of charge negotiation as a result of large amounts of weight placed on resources efficiency by the judiciary as opposed adequate attainment of justice, a utter disregard of communities values. Expression issue, not quite sure what you are arguing here? Furthermore, whilst ‘benefiting’ offenders, the DPP often use the promise of a reduced maximum penalty as a bargaining tool, raising the risk that offenders’ negotiated convictions may not match their culpability, concerning both societal interests in relation to the correct punishment of criminal conduct, and the offender, given the ability for the DPP to over-charge in order to force negotiation. Nice breakdown. Moreover, the non-transparent, clandestine nature of charge negotiation raises doubts within society as to whether the DPP’s motivations are in coherence with moral and ethical standards and subsequently the legitimacy of the agreements made. Nonetheless, through the promotion of prompt resolution in criminal cases, charge negotiation has been relatively reflective of moral and ethical standards in relation to the effective achievement of justice, enhancing community confidence in the criminal justice system. This was your strongest paragraph by far - Links effectively to question and a variety of effective evidence. Good work!
Although laws can be perceived by the community unjust, they are evidently introduced in order to meet society's needs. By assessing the usefulness of move on orders, DNA evidence and charge negotiation in balancing community expectation with the achievement of justice, it can be said that, whilst significant changes need to occur, the criminal justice system has been moderately reflective of current moral and ethical standards held by society.
2. ASSESS THE ROLE OF LAW REFORM IN ACHIEVING JUSTICE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMSpoilerThe role of reform is paramount in ensuring justice is achieved in the criminal justice system, linked to changing community values and ethical standards. With increasing emphasis placed upon protecting the safety and rights of the community, recent reforms have been made in relation to move on orders, the collection of DNA evidence and the employment of charge negotiation, all increasing the power of both police and the judiciary.
Driven by ideological intentions, recent reforms to the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act (2002) (LEPRA) have expanded police powers in the name of “public safety”. By attempting to uphold community interests, the commonwealth, under the LEPRA Amendment (Move On Directions) 2011, have imposed serious constraints upon the individuals use public spaces, unlawfully compromising one’s freedom to roam. With no offer for judicial review, essential safeguards have been removed, with the most vulnerable members of society being moved at a largely disproportionate rate in comparison to other members, as highlighted in ‘New Drunk, Disorderly Police Powers Penalise the Most Vulnerable’ (SMH: 23/9/14). Moreover, whilst introduced as a deterrent mechanism, the individual’s democratic right to protest peacefully is now dependent upon police discretion, with infringements upon the individual's rights going unchallenged, bringing otherwise law-abiding individuals into negative contact with the criminal justice system, evident during the Occupy Protests 2011. Following the Knitting Nannas Against Gas Protest 2016, the NSW government further reformed move on powers under the Crimes (Serious and Organised Crime) Legislation Amendment Bill 2016, pre-emptively criminalising unwanted political protests. Influenced by the Commonwealth's radical anti-terrorism legislation, it is evident move on orders are not in balance with current moral and ethical standards, impeding upon an individual's rights to freedom of movement and expression. Despite introduced to maintain community safety, these newly granted powers don’t adequately achieve justice, requiring further reform.
Ensuring proactivity to the rapidly evolving nature of forensic technology, significant reforms to statute law have occurred. The Crimes Amendment (Forensic Procedures) Act 2001 (CA) outlines the collection of forensic evidence as ‘in situ’, free from contamination. By actively acknowledging DNA’s influence in maintaining community interests and achieving justice for victims, the government have catalysed an over reliance upon its evidential accuracy. Naive of its impact upon the accused rights, this weight has caused serious miscarriages of justice, shown in the paramount case R v Jama (2008), provoking realisation for much-needed reform. With absence of any other evidence despite DNA, the prosecution benefited from what has been dubbed as the ‘CSI effect’, with misinformed jurors placing immense amounts of weight upon forensic evidence. Acting upon this unethical use of DNA, the nation's Attorney-general’s office implemented measures ensuring the ‘CSI effect’ no longer compromises the integrity and fairness of future criminal proceeding, both raising minimum DNA examination standards and addressing the potential for expert forensic evidence to be misunderstood. Furthermore, outlined in the CA (Forensic Procedures) 2000, police have been granted powers to build a DNA database, assisting in the effective prosecution of future and cold cases, highlighted in R v Castle (2009). However, David Shoebridge (Greens MP) claimed these powers are unproductive in achieving justice and violate the individual's common law right to privacy and freedom from governmental interference, calling for further reforms to the nature of forensics evidence.
Introduced to reform costly and lengthy court proceedings, charge negotiation is defined under the CA (Sentencing Procedure) 1999 as an agreement between the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the offender with respect to a guilty plea. The case of R v Thomson (2000) further reformed the law for the purpose of preserving resources, setting precedent indicating that the utilitarian value of a guilty plea must be dependent upon the timing of the plea. By increasing resource efficiency, charge negotiation has reduced the burden placed on taxpayers and the judiciary, as well as benefited offenders, guatanteening a reduced maximum penalty. However, the DPP often utilize charge negotiation as a bargaining tool, diminishing the victim's right to justice, as seen in the case of R v PLT (2003), prompting large amounts of public outcry following the death of police officer Glenn McEnallay. Written in response to this dismissal of moral and ethical standards, the Samuels Report 2002 into Charge Negotiation recommended that the DPP's guidelines ensure ''adequate consultation with victims'', placing significant amounts of pressure on the government, who in turn reviewed the protection of victim's rights under the law. However, the judiciary perceived resource efficiency of higher importance than the attainment of justice, with media coverage stating recommendations laid out in the report were being ignored for expediency purposes [‘Victims Ignored in Plea Deals’ (SMH 2009)]. Whilst unable to ensure procedural fairness, the media mobilised government action against such abuses, influencing the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment Act 2010, where reforms were made to charge negotiation, moving away from the believed process of negotiation and further towards reaching a ‘charge agreement’, ensuring consultation between victims and the DPP. However, non-transparent nature, the prosecution's discretionary powers play a large role in charge negotiation, raising doubts over the DPP’s motivations within society and the subsequent legitimacy of the agreements made. Whilst advantageous in increasing resource efficiency, charge negotiation has large impacts upon those affected by crime, specifically victims, unsuccessful in achieving justice for all parties involved.
Whilst the unfulfillment of justice is a central catalyst for law reform, evidence suggests that recent amendments to move on orders, forensic evidence and charge negotiation have all undermined the rights of individuals. By granting unnecessary discretionary powers to law enforcement bodies, the role of reform in the Australian criminal justice system has been ineffective in achieving justice, and in turn requires further reform specifically towards the security of common law rights.
Hey Jamon, thank you for all the great feedback. I've already taken it all into consideration and have edited the second essay with those comments in mind. If you haven't already started marking it, am I able to submit that instead of the one previously submitted?
Could I please have feedback for this crime essay? It is not written for the HSC but was an internal assignment so i am aware that it is far too long for the HSC but I'd like to know where I'm strong and where Im weaker. Thank you!!
x Georgia
Sorry Claudia, I reckon I finished marking JUST as you posted this! Hopefully the comments on the older version are still useful, happy to have a quick look at the newer version and give some brief comments too if you like :)
Sorry for the delay Georgia! Essay is attached with feedback in bold:SpoilerBroad sentencing discretion is central to the ability of the criminal courts to ensure justice is done in all the extraordinary variety of circumstances of individual offences and individual offenders.
— Chief Justice Spigelman
With reference to the quote, evaluate the effectiveness of sentencing and punishment as a means of achieving justice.
Achieving justice demands a careful balancing act between the interests of the community, the concerns of the victim, and the best interests of the offender. Thus, flexibility and discretion in sentencing and punishment is critical to ensuring justice is done. I like the ideas presented in this introduction - It definitely does the job in a basic sense. But you'll want it to be longer - Set up the paragraph topics and integrate the quote into your argument.
Guideline sentencing effectively balances the interests of the community, the concerns of the victim, and the rights of the offender, informing the exercise of judicial discretion in the area of sentencing. Nice evaluation at the forefront of the paragraph. Judicial guidelines derived from judgements decided on by the NSW Sentencing Council, such as the case R v Henry (1999), used for guilty pleas of armed robbery, ensures greater consistency and transparency in the way sentences are determined by judges. Good. Statutory guidelines involve looking at acts of parliament such as the Crimes (Sentencing Procedures) Act 1999 NSW. Try not to fall into content based response, keep the focus on evaluation. You don't need to explain terms at all! Statutes enhance the integrity of the legal process, facilitating greater uniformity in dealing with the extraordinary variety of circumstances of individual offences. Excellent point, R v Jacobs (2013) was the first case to issue the mandatory life sentence for murder of an on-duty police officer, under the Crimes Amendment (Murder of Police Officers) Act 2011. Media coverage addressed concerns of whether rights of conflicting parties had been achieved; ‘Is a police man’s life worth more?’ SMH (2011). I'd like to see you do more with this media article, you sort of acknowledge it exists but then immediately move on. R v Loveridge (2013) was a catalyst for change and reform, introducing an 8 year mandatory sentences for those convicted of ‘One punch’ laws under the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Assault and Intoxication) Act 2014. Would you say this was an effective change? Did it address what it was supposed to address, based on statistics? Through reform, tougher laws have championed the interests of the community, bringing sentences more into line with community standards. However, this statute has hindered the effectiveness of the CJS to perform with discretion and independence, impeding upon the rights of the accused and undermining fundamental rule of law principles. Fantastic summary of the key idea of this paragraph. Chief Justice Spigelman expressed a need for guidelines with broad, flexible scope, to provide structure for judicial discretion, promote consistency, and increase public confidence in sentencing; “Guideline judgments are a mechanism for structuring discretion, not for restricting discretion. The continued existence of sentencing discretion is an essential component of the fairness of our criminal justice system.” This is too late to be the first reference to the quotation - You've alluded to it, but it needs to be at the centre of attention!
An effective and just punishment for the individual and society is based upon a combination of the four purposes of punishment defined in the Crimes (Sentencing Procedures) Act 1999 NSW. Deterrence discourages certain behaviours by providing consequences. Specific deterrence refers to punishment of the individual to discourage recidivism. General deterrence refers to punishment setting an example for future offenders. Avoid content vomits like this - The marker knows this already! Assume they understand everything you say, chances are they do :) A BOSCAR 2006 investigation accounted for 41% of released prisoners reoffending within three years. Thus, incarceration is ineffective as a specific deterrent, failing to break the cycle of recidivism. The structure of this argument is a little backwards, I'd have preferred, "Incarceration is ineffective, AS SHOWN BY these statistics." Retribution considers impact upon the victim, family, and community. Lengthy custodial sentences such as the doubling of Kieren Loveridge’s sentence on appeal, are an example of punishment aimed at retribution. Rehabilitation aims to reform the offender. b]Avoid content vomit[/b]. This benefits the community by reducing the likelihood of recidivism. In looking at the high rate of recidivism within the first two years of conviction; 29% or 56% for young offenders, it is evident that justice is more likely to be achieved if rehabilitation is prioritised. Rehabilitation through the Drug Court effectively reduces recidivism by 37% (BOSCAR 2010). Conversely, rehabilitation is criticised for failing to adequately retribute those who have suffered. Although effective in ensuring society feels protected, incapacitation places financial stress on society at large, costing over $50 000/pa. Justice is not achieved in the long run as money would be more efficiently spent addressing underlying causes. This paragraph feels a lot messier and less cohesive than the first paragraph. No judgement is established at the start, not as much analysis and less effective evaluation - Definitely not quite the same quality as above.
The balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors is integral towards achieving justice in sentencing. Aggravating factors increase criminal culpability. This allows cases where the offender has abused a position of authority, such as the John Ellis case where he was sexually abused as an altar boy, to be dealt with more severely. This reflects society’s heightened level of denunciation associated with these crimes. Mitigating factors reduce criminal culpability and consider circumstances which provide context to the crime. This enables broad sentencing discretion of subjective factors; character reference, prior conviction, guilty plea, assisting police, and honest display of remorse with prospects for rehabilitation. This paragraph doesn't do much to evaluate the effectiveness of anything, much more like a content splurge. This is an example of a paragraph that you'd ignore when you shift this over to something to write in the exam room, it won't do anything for you!
Victims are guaranteed rights under the Victims Rights Act 1996. Victim Impact Statements (VIS) convey intimate insight to the impact of the offenders’ actions. This is content - The marker knows these things already! This effectively facilitates access to just outcomes for those impacted, by compelling judicial discretion and possible aggravating factors such as in Aguirre v Regina (2010). Try not to JUST reference a case and immediately move on. Good that you aren't lingering on case details that aren't important, but you still need to DO something with it. An important case to look at in terms of the role of the victim is R v Loveridge (2014). The judge considered aggravating factors; violent nature, and mitigating factors; offender’s display of remorse, disadvantaged background. On appeal, the sentence was doubled to a non-parole period of 10 years, reflecting the need for retribution to ensure a just outcome for the victim. A media article ‘Thomas Kelly Death was Never Murder’ (SMH 2014), described this as “trial by media”. This case highlights the controversy surrounding VIS, as the CJS struggles to balance the demands from the victim, with just outcomes for the accused. As put by Justice Ron Howie, “Judges have to remind the public they do not sentence for the victim, but for the community.” Only then can justice be achieved on a more consistent basis. Not much evaluation here, more content than anything else. You've also (I've just realised) not been integrating the stimulus!
Appeals are a means of ‘ensuring justice is done in all the extraordinary variety of circumstances of individual offences and individual offenders’. However, in the case R v AEM; KEM; MM (2002), the Crown appealed to the Criminal Court of Appeal against the leniency of a sentence given for a serious case of aggravated sexual assault in company. On appeal, the original sentences where more than doubled, from five and six, to 13 and 14 years’ imprisonment. Thus, ineffectiveness rises when there has been a failure to achieve justice the first time round, putting financial pressure on courts and being time consuming. Further ineffectiveness can be seen in R v Leung (2009, 2011 and 2013), where the defendant was tried three times for the same crime and was found not-guilty the first two times, wasting the CJS’s resources. You need proper judgements at the start and end of your paragraphs - Are appeals effective or ineffective when considered holistically? In between the two? Exploring either side is definitely okay but you want to make sure the marker knows that you aren't just rambling and throwing content and LCM's without consideration, which is sort of what this seems like. It needs more structure and purpose!
Penalties achieve justice by upholding community values and demonstrating enforcement of the law, and vary with respect to a judge’s discretion. Sort of have a judgement here, but not the most obvious - Try to make it a more obvious part of all of your introductions! Fines; (Section 17) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, are appropriate for strict liability or regulatory offences, resource-efficient, and raise revenue for governments to use in other areas. Nice considerations, but I'd still like a more obvious judgement (either now or after you delve into disadvantages. However as a ‘specific’ deterrent, fines disadvantage particular demographics, thus promoting institutionalised inequity. Furthermore, imprisonment accounts for a large portion of the CJS’s ineffectiveness. Why? This feels a little like a standalone statement, perhaps adding a statement like "especially in dealing with ________," to flow into the next part of the argument. Cohesion is important! The NSW Department of Juvenile Justice spends 48% of their budget keeping young offenders in custody, but no link has been found with decreased recidivism. Great! Just finish with "thus demonstrating the ineffectiveness of juvenile detention," for example, again it is all about obvious judgements! 27% of Australia’s prisoners are Indigenous, but Indigenous Australians make up only 3% of our total population. So? Link this to a judgement explicitly! Therefore, the over-representation in Indigenous incarceration accounts for great ineffectiveness as “Nearly 20 years after a Royal Commission into black deaths in custody recommended jail be used as a last resort, the proportion of indigenous prisoners has doubled.” Locking Out Rehabilitation (SMH 2009).
In involving a wider spectrum of interested people into the decision-making process, diversionary programs are successful alternatives to traditional modes of sentencing. The Magistrate’s Early Referral into Treatment (MERIT) programme breaks the cycle of drug abuse and crime by addressing underlying mental health and social welfare issues. BOCSAR (2009) found that within 12 months, reoffending dropped from 49% to 35%. Nice -
This was effective, and here's my proof. Simple. Good work. Conversely, the programme reduces personal accountability by focusing more on the causes of criminality rather than impacts. Circle sentencing is an alternative court for sentencing adult indigenous Australians where guilt is openly admitted. As making it meaningful by inviting community members and elders to take part in the sentencing process, recidivism rates and Aboriginal confidence in the criminal justice system improves. The Young Offenders Act 1997 allows referrals to Youth Justice Conferences. Make sure you are evaluating these alternative methods, not just stating what they are! However, Dr Don Weatherburn indicated that this alternative is no more effective than the NSW Children’s Court in reducing juvenile recidivism; “Those who participate in YJC’s find the experience very rewarding, but we may need to look elsewhere for programs that reduce the risk of juvenile reoffending.” Nice inclusion of quote. Ultimately, these alternative methods of sentencing are seen as coinciding, not replacing traditional forms of sentencing, and play a significant role in achieving greater equality, fairness and access within the sentencing and punishment process. Nice concluding sentence - The argument in this paragraph was quite strong, simple and direct - Good work!
In assessing the implications of post-sentencing considerations in achieving justice, the consequences of these decisions must be examined. In Police v Power (2007), the protective custody of Patrick Power, deputy DPP of NSW, failed to serve justice. Having been found in possession of child pornography and sentenced 15 months, Power only served 8 as he had been responsible for putting some of his fellow inmates in prison. Be sure to fully wrap up this thought with an evaluation - Was it an effective decision? Preventative detention as seen with the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2016 NSW, issues police the ability to detain and question terror suspects for 14 days without charge. Although effective in protecting the community, the rights of the individual are undermined. More specific? Under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW), released sexual offenders against children are put on the Australian National Child Offender Register (ANCOR) for at least 8 years. Ineffectiveness is seen with the push to remove young offender ‘sexters’ from this list, as rehabilitation and reintegration into the community is the primary goal. This is seen in a media article from 2016; “Issues of sex-texting for your offenders under review”. Be sure your paragraphs have a proper conclusion.
Sentencing and punishment emphasises the limitations in achieving a reasonable and effective balance between the rights of the suspects, the accused and the community. These examples reveal that when one person’s rights are respected, another’s are infringed upon. While to some extent balance is achieved, this balance is not always entirely effective.
Comments:
- As you've mentioned, far too long for use in an exam scenario - You'll need to cut back for use in the HSC! ;D
- You've not incorporated the quote in your essay - If presented with a quote in an exam scenario it MUST form a big part of your argument. It should be paraphrased or otherwise referenced in your intro and used throughout the response as well ;D
- You've got a fantastic body of evidence - Lots of laws, cases, media, stats and reports. Excellent work, I bet the research took ages! What I'm looking for is doing more with the evidence. Right now you are giving me a lot of $2 cheeseburgers - You've got the evidence and sometimes a bit of evaluation, but often it is a little quick. Instead, focus on giving me a few Big Macs, a few bits of evidence analysed in detail with an explicit judgement. However...
- Don't fall into regurgitating content! The marker is a Legal Studies expert, they know the terminology and they know the laws. You should only ever give the bare minimum of detail for your argument to make sense.
My comments throughout should cover the rest of my thoughts - It's a strong essay! Everything you would want to include evidence-wise is there. It just needs a little polish :)
Ahhh what a shame! That's okay any feedback is appreciated! I'll take a look at the one you've just marked and further refine my essay. If you could have a quick skim over it once it is down that would be awesome! THANK YOU SO MUCH :)
Here is my revised essay with all your feedback! I'm worried there isn't enough LCMID, but it is just under 800 words so I'm not sure what to do. Thank you so much again!
Hi Jamon,
I just wanted to say thank you so much for marking my Human Rights Essay last term! I got it back, and received 19/20 which was the highest, so I'm pretty happy!
Thank you again,
Mary
Hi, I spoke to you at your SOR lecture in the holidays and you had said that you predicted that law reform may be asked and I'm doing CSSA next week which you had said try to predict the HSC Q's. So here's a Law reform essay I put together. Thank You!!!
Hey Jamon/Elyse,
I have my legal trial next Wednesday and was wondering if you could look through one of my practice essays for consumers. We are having two essays for consumers in our exams because we haven't finished family law yet so consumers is worth 50%-which is huge! I'm a bit worried with some of my judgements? Also, should I include more successful/effective ways? Can you help me improve my thesis-I think it needs to be a little bit stronger? My essay is only about 750 words-should I include more in an exam? How many words average should it be?
Thanks so much!! I have sent this to my teacher but any help is really appreciated!
Hey Katie! I didn't study consumers, so take my advice with a grain of salt, but hopefully this helps! ;DHey Jamon,SpoilerTo what extent does consumer law reflect the values and ethical standards of society.
Consumer law is slightly ineffective in reflecting the values and ethical standards of society. I'd like you to elaborate on 'slightly ineffective' a little bit, what sort of factors are you considering? This is seen through the protection of consumer’s rights when purchasing and using a product, product certification, credit law and safety. The law is effective in providing refunds and recalls to consumers who receive faulty products and in prosecuting businesses that do not follow the credit laws. However the law is unsuccessful in clearly defining what the labels ‘organic’ and ‘free range’ are and therefore confusing consumers. Mandatory reporting is also slightly unsuccessful as it relies on businesses being honest and can result in many injuries before being reported. Solid introduction, lays out your points clearly, but I'm not 100% sure whether you've linked these things to "values and ethical standards" quite enough to have answered the question properly. Right now it feels like you mention it initially and then it is forgotten a little bit?
Consumer law attempts to reflect the values of society through the protection of consumer’s rights when purchasing and using a product. Make a more specific judgement here - Are they succesful in this attempt? The Australian consumer law 2010, acknowledges that consumers should have products that are fit for their intended purpose, free from defects, safe, and acceptable in appearance and finish. Ensure your references to legislation take the proper format, with the year and the jurisdiction. This law requires businesses to give refunds to products that do not work, and recall those that have significant safety issues. Fair enough, but not super necessary to delve into the specifics of the law - Focus more on the example and the evaluation that follows. This can be seen through the recall of Takata airbags in 2017, as they were faulty causing many injuries and deaths. Therefore, the Australian consumer law, has been successful in reflecting consumer’s values through the enforcement and protection of consumer rights. The evidence in this paragraph is a little shaky, a little bit more than a law and a case would be excellent if you can. Any stats on how many claims or how effective the law has been on a wider scale?
Another issue that is somewhat ineffective in protecting the ethical standards of society is that of product certification. Watch your wording, issues aren't ineffective, it is the RESPONSE to the issues that is ineffective. The issue of organic produce can be very confusing for consumers as there isn’t one clear definition on what organic really means. Peter Kell, from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), states that there is ‘no neat, definitive approach to every aspect of organic’. There are eight different certifiers for organic produce in Australia and they all abide by different standards. Australian consumer law s lacking in this area as products that are not certified can still use the words ‘organic’, ‘fresh’ and ‘natural’ in their labelling. This example is taking a little long to get into - Delving into specifics isn't going to get you marks, the examiner doesn't care what organic actually means! This is similarly seen through ‘free range’ eggs where the label can have a number of different meanings. They also have a number of different certification boards with their own standards. The consumer NGO, Choice published an article in May 2017, arguing the need for mandatory certification and labelling as consumers are being mislead about what a free range egg really is. In addition to this, Choice has made an app, free-range egg buying guide and lobbied the government for a national code. This further reinforces the ineffectiveness of the law in reflecting consumer values as there is much confusion on the issue of product certification. This paragraph is limited in its effectiveness because there isn't a whole lot of reference to the actual legal response to product certification - More just an explanation of WHY it is an issue, if that makes sense?
Credit law and payday loans are somewhat effective in reflecting the values of society. This is evidenced when ASIC forced the payday lending company Cash Converters to pay $12 million following a probe into illegal business practises. Ensure you don't use any abbreviations before using the full name at least once. ASIC gave the business 30 infringement notices under the credit act as they had ‘failed to asses small amount loans as unsuitable’ and then entered into these loans. What act are you referencing here specifically? Ensure you reference it properly The article Calls for Stricter payday lending laws (SMH, 2015), argues that there needs to be a ‘push for tighter protections to be introduced’. It also states that the ‘2013 payday lending legislation was “horrendously complicated”’ and that the laws needed to be simplified. This is an excellent quote, but it would be MORE effective if you had brought up the specific laws it is discussing yourself, and said, "Right, these are ineffective. This media article agrees with me.", rather than letting it do the work for you. Therefore, credit law only somewhat reflects consumer values as it can be enforced but has complicated legislation that is difficult to understand.
Safety is also a slightly ineffective issue in reflecting the ethical standards of society as it is often based on the integrity and honesty of a business. The article, ‘Thermomix feels burn of ACCC case’ (Daily telegraph, 2017), argues the ineffectiveness of mandatory sentencing in providing safe products for consumers. Love how contemporary your examples are, excellent job there. The company, Thermomix forced consumers to sign gag orders and was 1200 days late in advising the safety advisors of the faulty product. In that time, the product had burned 14 users. Choice exposed the scale of this by revealing that the faulty product had led to at least 87 different incidents. This further reiterates the ineffectiveness of consumer law in reflecting the ethical issue of safety due to the lack of honesty in mandatory sentencing.
Therefore, consumer law is slightly ineffective in reflecting the ethical standards of society through enforcement and protection of rights when purchasing and using a product, product certification, safety, and credit law. This is because there is no clear definition of ‘organic’ or ‘free range’, and mandatory sentencing is reliant on the integrity and honesty of businesses. However, consumer law is able to provide refunds, recalls and replacements of faulty products and force companies to pay significant fines and hand infringement notices.
This is a cool essay Katie, love your contemporary examples and extensive reference to media to support your arguments. Excellent work there. I think your judgement is clear most of the way through, it is how you are backing up those arguments that is a little lacking for me. Ensure you are referencing laws in the proper format, and ensure you aren't using media articles to do the arguing for you. Make the judgement yourself, then reference the media article as further support to that argument. I'm not sure exactly what is available to you in Consumers, but I feel there is a bit too much detail where you don't need it (particularly the paragraph on free range) - Aim to be concise and include more and more varied examples ;D
In terms of your Thesis, I think the weakness is the link to moral and ethical standards. What does it mean to uphold them? What is the link between your points and the question? This needs to be stronger to me.
A 750 word essay is definitely on the low end for the HSC, for an essay of this length you'll really need to pack in the evidence and remove redundant information. Aiming for a few more words by the time the HSC rolls around would be good, I think :)
Hope this helps! Good luck for Wednesday ;D
Hey Jamon,
Thanks so much for the feedback! It's been incredibly helpful! Hopefully, I can remember all my evidence for Wednesday! :)
With my thesis what do you mean by 'what sort of factors am I considering'? What do you mean by include more varied examples-what stuff should I try to include? How many words were your option essays? Should I try to include another paragraph or elaborate more on some of my paragraphs? Should I increase the words for Wednesday?
Thanks again! :D
Hello!'
I've been looking at past essay questions on world order and i was sort of struggling with these three
-Explain the role of nation states in achieving world order
-Discuss how the nature of conflict provides challenges for achieving world order
-Discuss how state sovereignty can assist or impede the resolution of world order issues
could you please help me in what points should i discuss in these essays please as im super duper lost.
thank you very much! really appreciate your help :) :)
'
Hey there! With the first one, state sovereignty would be at the crux of my response! Talking about cooperation, the means of achieving cooperation, the problems when states do not cooperate, and so on. I'd be very happy with this question :)
For the second question I'd be taking a similar approach in terms of making state sovereignty a central argument. Conflict between values, armed conflict, nuclear conflict, colonial conflict - all of this comes from state sovereignty being exercised or maybe even challenged.
And the last one - a similar theme. How does the UN engage with encouraging state cooperation? How does the international community deal with states that are "rogue?" How does the P5 work? Also consider R2P! :)
Ooooohhh those could work really well!
Also im started another essay on "ASSESS THE ROLE OF LAW REFORM IN PROMOTING AND MAINTAINING WORLD ORDER."
and i have pargraphs on
- how the ICC formed from adhoc tribunals
- the formation of the UN from the league of nations and the treaty of westphalia
and i was wondering if you could hlp me on what i should discuss in my third ( which is also my last) paragraph) is there anyother area that has undergone law reform exclusing contemporary issues as we arents being tested for those and tose arent my strong areas right now?
Thank you sooo soooo much! :)))
HEY,
I just wrote this world order essay on the State Soveringty, can someone please take a look ?
Hello,
I have made an essay plan on the question "Examine the role of state sovereignty in assisting and impeding the resolution of world order issues." it doesnt have an introduction/conculstion yet but i was wondering if you could please check my ideas and points i make in my body paragraphs to see if im on the right track in how i answer the question and if my points even make sense especially the last on political will? (the dashes that are underlined and bolded are the main points ill discuss the paragraph)
Thank you very much
Hey guys,
can someone pls explain how i would answer this question:
"assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order"
Thanks
hey guys,
i started writing an essay on this question "assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order" so can someone pls give me feedback on what i wrote so far.
thanks
Hey! You'll need 75 posts to qualify for a proper bit of feedback, you aren't far off! Perhaps work on posting a few more times while you work on the rest of the essay, that way I can give it feedback all at once :) on a quick skim, watch that you aren't spending too long on a single example - The ICJ paragraph really only analyses one example. It would be good to see another case, for you to trim down the descriptions of how the ICJ operates and substitute it for more evidence and analysis :)
hey guys,
i started writing an essay on this question "assess the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in dealing with issues of compliance and non-compliance with laws relating to world order" so can someone pls give me feedback on what i wrote so far. Also can u pls explain how I would talk about a non legal response.
thanks
hey guys
i was wondering if you could please mark my fam law essay on same sex and also tell me if im assessing it well please? my main problem in essays is that i am 'describing' it according to teachers and i dont know how to solve this. if you have any tips and tricks it would be relaly appriciated if you can share them :) :) :) :) Also if you could also suggest which band this essay lies in it will also be great! :)
Thank you sooo much guys
hey guys
i was wondering if you could please mark my fam law essay on same sex and also tell me if im assessing it well please? my main problem in essays is that i am 'describing' it according to teachers and i dont know how to solve this. if you have any tips and tricks it would be relaly appriciated if you can share them :) :) :) :) Also if you could also suggest which band this essay lies in it will also be great! :)
Thank you sooo much guys
hey guys
i was wondering if you could please check this essay for me? I'm not sure if im properly addressing the questions and was wondering if i could get some feedback please and an indication of which band would it lie in
Thank you sooooo much
Also, is it now 50 posts? If so, how many more do i need now if I don't qualify for this one, or want to qualify for another one? Thank you
This qualifies - Your next one will need 130 posts! :)
How many posts do essay plans cost?
If that's the case, can you please look over just my introduction for my Crime essay from the 2016 paper.
" The criminal justice system has various mechanisms to ensure that young offenders’ rights are at the forefront in order for justice to properly be achieved. For young offenders to achieve justice, the criminal justice system must take into account the negative circumstances children could be brought up in, which can result in children engaging in criminal behaviour. In order for this to be effectively executed, the criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently to a large extent. The way in which the criminal justice system has handled the treatment of young offenders is expressed through the notion of doli incapax, the Children’s Court and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes."
I've already written the rest of the essay out, but since I don't have the required amount of posts, I'm not posting the whole essay.
If that's the case, can you please look over just my introduction for my Crime essay from the 2016 paper.
" The criminal justice system has various mechanisms to ensure that young offenders’ rights are at the forefront in order for justice to properly be achieved. For young offenders to achieve justice, the criminal justice system must take into account the negative circumstances children could be brought up in, which can result in children engaging in criminal behaviour. In order for this to be effectively executed, the criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently to a large extent. The way in which the criminal justice system has handled the treatment of young offenders is expressed through the notion of doli incapax, the Children’s Court and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes."
Hey ! I'd be happy to take a look at your essay. It obviously wouldn't be as great as getting feedback from a state ranker, but it's a step in the right direction. Feel free to send it through here :)
Hey ! I'd be happy to take a look at your essay. It obviously wouldn't be as great as getting feedback from a state ranker, but it's a step in the right direction. Feel free to send it through here :)
I like this introduction! It sets a good rationale for the arguments in terms of how they are important and why, I'd just say you need to address the question a little more directly in terms of how well each response is actually able to treat the young offender differently to achieve justice. Meaning, how well are those things you list in the end able to achieve that differentiation?
Good stuff though! I think it's a great start - You could tidy up the expression in the first few sentences to make the whole thing shorter if you liked (a bit of repetition early on), but definitely fantastic introduction :)
‘The criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently in order to achieve
justice.’
To what extent is this statement true?
OriginalSpoilerThe criminal justice system has various mechanisms to ensure that young offenders’ rights are at the forefront in order for justice to properly be achieved. For young offenders to achieve justice, the criminal justice system must take into account the negative circumstances children could be brought up in, which can result in children engaging in criminal behaviour. In order for this to be effectively executed, the criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently to a large extent. The way in which the criminal justice system has handled the treatment of young offenders is expressed through the notion of doli incapax, the Children’s Court and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes.
The notion of doli incapax reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to be achieved. In most cases, the community and the law recognise that young offenders have not reached full adulthood, therefore limiting their capacity to recognise right from wrong and highlights the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to achieved. Despite the application of doli incapax being criticised, especially in high-profile cases relating to heinous crimes committed by children, the importance of doli incapax for young offenders to achieve justice, is highlighted in Thomas Crofts paper ‘Doli incapax: Why children deserve its protection’ in which he states that it is consistent with the principles of international law (Convention on the Rights of the Child) in which Australia is a signatory. Furthermore, the case of Corey Davis allowed an 11 year old offender to be acquitted, thus proving that the notion of doli incapax applies. Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system uses doli incapax to treat young offenders differently, to ensure that justice is achieved.
The Children’s Court also reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently for justice to be achieved. Established in 1987 under the Children’s Court Act 1987 (NSW), the court has dual roles that deal with criminal matters of children under 18 years and the matters of care and protection of children. The Children’s Court follows procedures laid out under the Children’s (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), which acts as a guideline for courts to show regard for children, in order for justice to be achieved. The Children’s Court allows the criminal justice system to achieve justice by allowing children’s proceedings to be conducted in a closed court in order to protect the identity of the child, to ensure differing penalties and sentencing procedures differ from those of ordinary courts. This is evident in the case of a Geelong teenager “guilty of sexually assaulting eight women” being placed on a two-year probation in which the judge ordered the boy to undergo a positive sexuality course as part of his probation. Ultimately, the criminal justice system uses the Children’s Court in order for young offenders to achieve justice.
Lastly, the three-tiered system of diversionary processes also enables the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. Under the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW), children who have committed an offence proceed through a three-tiered system of diversionary processes known as warnings, cautions and youth justice conferences. These programs allow children to have alternative punishments to traditional criminal processes and court penalties, thus allowing the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently. The use of warnings allow children to have no conditions attached to their offence which is detailed under s15 of the YOA. Police can also issue a more formal warning in the form of a caution, which can only be given if the child admits to the offence or has a legal guardian present. Furthermore, the youth justice conference allows the offender to take responsibility for their actions and to promote better family understanding of the issues. However, a report entitled “Reoffending among young people cautioned by police or who participated in a youth justice conference” reveals that the introduction of police cautions and youth justice conferences have led to a significant increase in recidivism rates. For example, in 2004-05, approximately 1,200 young offenders completed a YJC or received a caution, which resulted in 58% reoffending within the next five years. Nevertheless, the criminal justice system uses the three-tiered system of diversionary processes in order for young offenders to achieve justice.
Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system needs to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. This has resulted in the notion of doli incapax, which considers the capacity for young offenders to recognise right from wrong, the Children’s Court which allows special provisions for young offenders and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes which allows children to have alternative sentences.
With feedbackSpoilerThe criminal justice system has various mechanisms to ensure that young offenders’ rights are at the forefront in orderfor justice to properly be achieved"to achieve justice".Simple thesis, however I feel as though you aren't hitting the question correctly. Firstly, you're thesis must include your judgement to the extent you believe the statement is true. i.e. is the statement accurate to a high, partial or limited extent. Secondly, you need to explicitly refer to the statement provided. I know that throughout your essay you've been mentioning aspects of the quote, but try to have actual quotation marks so that you can indicate to the marker that you're directly answering the question. For young offenders toachieverecieve the young offender is not 'achieving justice', they're 'receiving' itjustice, the criminal justice system must take into account the negative circumstances children could be brought up in, which can result in children engaging in criminal behaviour.This sentence is a bit limiting and does not encompass the entirety of why young offenders should be treated differently. Although what you say is definitely true, I personally feel that mentioning "the vulnerability of children and their inability to produce a mens rea" is something that captures the topic much more holistically. Furthermore, this would stop you from clumping everything that you want to talk about at the end, which i'll get into later. In order for this to be effectively executed, the criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently to a large extent.THIS is the type of sentence that markers are looking for. However, mentioning it at this point of the introduction is a bit awkward. I'd recommend cutting this sentence and merging it with your thesis. The way in which the criminal justice system has handled the treatment of young offenders is expressed through the notion of doli incapax, the Children’s Court and thethree-tiered system of diversionary processesalternatives to court Okay I don't know how others feel about this, but I reckon you shouldn't dump your main ideas in the one sentence, particularly as your closing sentence. Like I said before, mention the notion of doli incapax in the statement above. Also, save the terminology of the 'three-tiered system of diversionary processes', and use it for your paragraphs. For now, you need to refer to the words of the syllabus, so call it 'alternatives to court'. This also applies for doli incapax, it's a bit petty but the actual heading is 'age of criminal responsibility', so try to include that somewhere as well. This introduction needs an extra sentence which will capture your final judgement. Thus, it is highly accurate that the criminal justice system must "treat young offenders differently"
The notion of doli incapax reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to be achieved.In most cases,unnecessary The community and the law recognise that young offenders have not reached full adulthood, therefore limiting their capacity to recognise right from wrong and highlights the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to achieved. Try to include legal terminology such as 'mens rea'. It might not seem important to you, but it's one of the criteria which you are being assessed on. Also, try to bring in legislation; doli incapax is regulated under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 Despite the application of doli incapax being criticised, especially in high-profile cases relating to heinous crimes committed by children, the importance of doli incapax for young offenders to achieve justice, is highlighted in Thomas Crofts paper ‘Doli incapax: Why children deserve its protection’ in which he states that it is consistent with the principles of international law (Convention on the Rights of the Child) in which Australia is a signatory.Nice inclusion. However, your analysis is really lacking. Whenever you cite a media article, or a case, you need to say how this relates to the question. i.e. this demonstrates that the statement is highly accurate, as... Furthermore, the case of Corey Davis allowed an 11 year old offender to be acquitted, thus proving that the notion of doli incapax applies. This case could be fleshed out so much more if you put it before the 'despite doli incapax being criticised sentence'. Reason being is that it flows much better after your explanation of what doli incapax is. Also, the case received public outcry, hence leading you on to the next sentence. Just a quick note, proper citation of the case would be R v LMW, you can bring in the victim Corey Davis later in the sentence. Again, you haven't analysed your evidence enough - you need to show how it relates to the question. You can't just top and tail your judgement at the beginning and end of your paragraph, with no mention of it in between. Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system uses doli incapax to "treat young offenders differently", to ensure that justice is achieved. For further discussion, you could bring in Bronson Blessington, the 14 year old who was sentenced to life imprisonment. This would give you a springboard to discuss the different levels of criminal responsibility. i.e. Children over 14 are not covered by doli incapax, thus breaching article 37 of the CROC, which states that no child should be sentenced to life imprisonment.
The Children’s Court also reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently for justice to be achieved. Established in1987Avoid repetition as it disrupts flow under the Children’s Court Act 1987 (NSW), the court has dual roles that deal with criminal matters of children under 18 years and the matters of care and protection of children. The Children’s Court follows procedures laid out under the Children’s (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), which acts as a guideline for courts to show regard for children, in order for justice to be achieved. The Children’s Court allows the criminal justice system to achieve justice by allowing children’s proceedings to be conducted in a closed court in order to protect the identity of the child, to ensure differing penalties and sentencing procedures differ from those of ordinary courts. This is evident in the case of a Geelong teenager “guilty of sexually assaulting eight women” being placed on a two-year probation in which the judge I don't know much about this case. However, if it was a JUDGE who determined the sentence, then it would not have occurred in the Children's Court. Keep in mind that it is a magistrate who presides here. ordered the boy to undergo a positive sexuality course as part of his probation. Again, you really need to analyse your cases more. Move this towards the middle of your paragraph so that you can have more of a discussion on it, particularly how it demonstrates your judgement in relation to the question. Ultimately, the criminal justice system uses the Children’s Court in order for young offenders toachievereceive justice. Feedback in this paragraph relates to the previous one - you need to be sustaining an argument throughout, rather than just top and tailing your judgement at the beginning and end.
Lastly, thethree-tiered system of diversionary processesalternatives to court also enables the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. This thesis is far too repetitive - try to word it differently Under the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW), children who have committed an offence proceed through a three-tiered system of diversionary processes known as warnings, cautions and youth justice conferences. These programs allow children to have alternative punishments to traditional criminal processes and court penalties, thus allowing the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently. The use of warnings allow children to have no conditions attached to their offence which is detailed under s15 of the YOA. Police can also issue a more formal warning in the form of a caution, which can only be given if the child admits to the offence or has a legal guardian present. Way, way way too much content dumping. You only need to mention content in your elaboration (where you cited the YOA the first time). After that, the focus should be on introducing media articles,
cases, statistics which prove your judgement.Furthermore, the youth justice conference allows the offender to take responsibility for their actions and to promote better family understanding of the issues. However, a reportentitled “Reoffending among young people cautioned by police or who participated in a youth justice conference” reveals that the introduction of police cautions and youth justice conferences have led to a significant increase in recidivism rates. For example, in 2004-05, approximately 1,200 young offenders completed a YJC or received a caution, which resulted in 58% reoffending within the next five years.Analyse this statistic. What does this show? What's the purpose of including this statistic? Nevertheless, the criminal justice system uses the three-tiered system of diversionary processes in order for young offenders to achieve justice. This lacks a judgement. Is the statement you were provided highly accurate, partially accurate, or inaccurate?You could flesh out this argument with a more sophisticated discussion on warnings. i.e. Police discretion allows young offenders to avoid the court system. Children who undergo the court process are more likely to develop criminal tendencies etc etc..
Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system needs to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. This has resulted in the notion of doli incapax, which considers the capacity for young offenders to recognise right from wrong, the Children’s Court which allows special provisions for young offenders and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes which allows children to have alternative sentences Lacks a final, conclusive judgement regarding the accuracy of the statement.
First off, a quick foreword that I tend to mark somewhat harsher than that of normal markers. Please don't take anything to heart, I'm a HSC student just like you and could easily have made some errors.
There you go, feedback is in red, suggestions are in blue. :)
Overall feedback:
Your topic sentence for every paragraph is the exact same, with only slight changes depending on what specifically you're talking about. While this helps you in terms of simplicity, it becomes way too mundane for the marker. I'll also mention that your thesis is lacking a judgement. The question is literally 'To what extent is this statement true?', so your entire essay is supposed to be whether you think it's true or not. Based off memory I only remember a handful of times where a judgement was explicitly mentioned. Also, your analysis of media articles and cases are far too short. These are supposed to be the backbone of your argument, so it needs to be discussed so much more. You could easily achieve this by cutting down on your content and focusing more on the analysis of cases. Furthermore, you tend to bring in the case in your second last sentence. If you were to introduce it in the middle or near the beginning, you could easily have a more sophisticated discussion of it.
Strong points would include your structure, which I believe is the ideal way to answer this question. The evidence you provide are great (but like I said, you lack an actual analysis of them). Also, you clearly understand your crime content.
I would give this essay a 9/15. Reason being is that it ticks all the boxes in that range. In order to reach the 10-12 range, specific areas to work on are:
-Making a judgement
-Analysis of evidence
-Legal terminology
-Reference the statement! Use quotes to show you're actually including it in your response.
‘The criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently in order to achieve
justice.’
To what extent is this statement true?
OriginalSpoilerThe criminal justice system has various mechanisms to ensure that young offenders’ rights are at the forefront in order for justice to properly be achieved. For young offenders to achieve justice, the criminal justice system must take into account the negative circumstances children could be brought up in, which can result in children engaging in criminal behaviour. In order for this to be effectively executed, the criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently to a large extent. The way in which the criminal justice system has handled the treatment of young offenders is expressed through the notion of doli incapax, the Children’s Court and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes.
The notion of doli incapax reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to be achieved. In most cases, the community and the law recognise that young offenders have not reached full adulthood, therefore limiting their capacity to recognise right from wrong and highlights the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to achieved. Despite the application of doli incapax being criticised, especially in high-profile cases relating to heinous crimes committed by children, the importance of doli incapax for young offenders to achieve justice, is highlighted in Thomas Crofts paper ‘Doli incapax: Why children deserve its protection’ in which he states that it is consistent with the principles of international law (Convention on the Rights of the Child) in which Australia is a signatory. Furthermore, the case of Corey Davis allowed an 11 year old offender to be acquitted, thus proving that the notion of doli incapax applies. Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system uses doli incapax to treat young offenders differently, to ensure that justice is achieved.
The Children’s Court also reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently for justice to be achieved. Established in 1987 under the Children’s Court Act 1987 (NSW), the court has dual roles that deal with criminal matters of children under 18 years and the matters of care and protection of children. The Children’s Court follows procedures laid out under the Children’s (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), which acts as a guideline for courts to show regard for children, in order for justice to be achieved. The Children’s Court allows the criminal justice system to achieve justice by allowing children’s proceedings to be conducted in a closed court in order to protect the identity of the child, to ensure differing penalties and sentencing procedures differ from those of ordinary courts. This is evident in the case of a Geelong teenager “guilty of sexually assaulting eight women” being placed on a two-year probation in which the judge ordered the boy to undergo a positive sexuality course as part of his probation. Ultimately, the criminal justice system uses the Children’s Court in order for young offenders to achieve justice.
Lastly, the three-tiered system of diversionary processes also enables the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. Under the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW), children who have committed an offence proceed through a three-tiered system of diversionary processes known as warnings, cautions and youth justice conferences. These programs allow children to have alternative punishments to traditional criminal processes and court penalties, thus allowing the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently. The use of warnings allow children to have no conditions attached to their offence which is detailed under s15 of the YOA. Police can also issue a more formal warning in the form of a caution, which can only be given if the child admits to the offence or has a legal guardian present. Furthermore, the youth justice conference allows the offender to take responsibility for their actions and to promote better family understanding of the issues. However, a report entitled “Reoffending among young people cautioned by police or who participated in a youth justice conference” reveals that the introduction of police cautions and youth justice conferences have led to a significant increase in recidivism rates. For example, in 2004-05, approximately 1,200 young offenders completed a YJC or received a caution, which resulted in 58% reoffending within the next five years. Nevertheless, the criminal justice system uses the three-tiered system of diversionary processes in order for young offenders to achieve justice.
Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system needs to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. This has resulted in the notion of doli incapax, which considers the capacity for young offenders to recognise right from wrong, the Children’s Court which allows special provisions for young offenders and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes which allows children to have alternative sentences.
With feedbackSpoilerThe criminal justice system has various mechanisms to ensure that young offenders’ rights are at the forefront in orderfor justice to properly be achieved"to achieve justice".Simple thesis, however I feel as though you aren't hitting the question correctly. Firstly, you're thesis must include your judgement to the extent you believe the statement is true. i.e. is the statement accurate to a high, partial or limited extent. Secondly, you need to explicitly refer to the statement provided. I know that throughout your essay you've been mentioning aspects of the quote, but try to have actual quotation marks so that you can indicate to the marker that you're directly answering the question. For young offenders toachieverecieve the young offender is not 'achieving justice', they're 'receiving' itjustice, the criminal justice system must take into account the negative circumstances children could be brought up in, which can result in children engaging in criminal behaviour.This sentence is a bit limiting and does not encompass the entirety of why young offenders should be treated differently. Although what you say is definitely true, I personally feel that mentioning "the vulnerability of children and their inability to produce a mens rea" is something that captures the topic much more holistically. Furthermore, this would stop you from clumping everything that you want to talk about at the end, which i'll get into later. In order for this to be effectively executed, the criminal justice system must treat young offenders differently to a large extent.THIS is the type of sentence that markers are looking for. However, mentioning it at this point of the introduction is a bit awkward. I'd recommend cutting this sentence and merging it with your thesis. The way in which the criminal justice system has handled the treatment of young offenders is expressed through the notion of doli incapax, the Children’s Court and thethree-tiered system of diversionary processesalternatives to court Okay I don't know how others feel about this, but I reckon you shouldn't dump your main ideas in the one sentence, particularly as your closing sentence. Like I said before, mention the notion of doli incapax in the statement above. Also, save the terminology of the 'three-tiered system of diversionary processes', and use it for your paragraphs. For now, you need to refer to the words of the syllabus, so call it 'alternatives to court'. This also applies for doli incapax, it's a bit petty but the actual heading is 'age of criminal responsibility', so try to include that somewhere as well. This introduction needs an extra sentence which will capture your final judgement. Thus, it is highly accurate that the criminal justice system must "treat young offenders differently"
The notion of doli incapax reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to be achieved.In most cases,unnecessary The community and the law recognise that young offenders have not reached full adulthood, therefore limiting their capacity to recognise right from wrong and highlights the need for young offenders to be treated differently in order for justice to achieved. Try to include legal terminology such as 'mens rea'. It might not seem important to you, but it's one of the criteria which you are being assessed on. Also, try to bring in legislation; doli incapax is regulated under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 Despite the application of doli incapax being criticised, especially in high-profile cases relating to heinous crimes committed by children, the importance of doli incapax for young offenders to achieve justice, is highlighted in Thomas Crofts paper ‘Doli incapax: Why children deserve its protection’ in which he states that it is consistent with the principles of international law (Convention on the Rights of the Child) in which Australia is a signatory.Nice inclusion. However, your analysis is really lacking. Whenever you cite a media article, or a case, you need to say how this relates to the question. i.e. this demonstrates that the statement is highly accurate, as... Furthermore, the case of Corey Davis allowed an 11 year old offender to be acquitted, thus proving that the notion of doli incapax applies. This case could be fleshed out so much more if you put it before the 'despite doli incapax being criticised sentence'. Reason being is that it flows much better after your explanation of what doli incapax is. Also, the case received public outcry, hence leading you on to the next sentence. Just a quick note, proper citation of the case would be R v LMW, you can bring in the victim Corey Davis later in the sentence. Again, you haven't analysed your evidence enough - you need to show how it relates to the question. You can't just top and tail your judgement at the beginning and end of your paragraph, with no mention of it in between. Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system uses doli incapax to "treat young offenders differently", to ensure that justice is achieved. For further discussion, you could bring in Bronson Blessington, the 14 year old who was sentenced to life imprisonment. This would give you a springboard to discuss the different levels of criminal responsibility. i.e. Children over 14 are not covered by doli incapax, thus breaching article 37 of the CROC, which states that no child should be sentenced to life imprisonment.
The Children’s Court also reveals how the criminal justice system recognises the need for young offenders to be treated differently for justice to be achieved. Established in1987Avoid repetition as it disrupts flow under the Children’s Court Act 1987 (NSW), the court has dual roles that deal with criminal matters of children under 18 years and the matters of care and protection of children. The Children’s Court follows procedures laid out under the Children’s (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), which acts as a guideline for courts to show regard for children, in order for justice to be achieved. The Children’s Court allows the criminal justice system to achieve justice by allowing children’s proceedings to be conducted in a closed court in order to protect the identity of the child, to ensure differing penalties and sentencing procedures differ from those of ordinary courts. This is evident in the case of a Geelong teenager “guilty of sexually assaulting eight women” being placed on a two-year probation in which the judge I don't know much about this case. However, if it was a JUDGE who determined the sentence, then it would not have occurred in the Children's Court. Keep in mind that it is a magistrate who presides here. ordered the boy to undergo a positive sexuality course as part of his probation. Again, you really need to analyse your cases more. Move this towards the middle of your paragraph so that you can have more of a discussion on it, particularly how it demonstrates your judgement in relation to the question. Ultimately, the criminal justice system uses the Children’s Court in order for young offenders toachievereceive justice. Feedback in this paragraph relates to the previous one - you need to be sustaining an argument throughout, rather than just top and tailing your judgement at the beginning and end.
Lastly, thethree-tiered system of diversionary processesalternatives to court also enables the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. This thesis is far too repetitive - try to word it differently Under the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW), children who have committed an offence proceed through a three-tiered system of diversionary processes known as warnings, cautions and youth justice conferences. These programs allow children to have alternative punishments to traditional criminal processes and court penalties, thus allowing the criminal justice system to treat young offenders differently. The use of warnings allow children to have no conditions attached to their offence which is detailed under s15 of the YOA. Police can also issue a more formal warning in the form of a caution, which can only be given if the child admits to the offence or has a legal guardian present. Way, way way too much content dumping. You only need to mention content in your elaboration (where you cited the YOA the first time). After that, the focus should be on introducing media articles,
cases, statistics which prove your judgement.Furthermore, the youth justice conference allows the offender to take responsibility for their actions and to promote better family understanding of the issues. However, a reportentitled “Reoffending among young people cautioned by police or who participated in a youth justice conference” reveals that the introduction of police cautions and youth justice conferences have led to a significant increase in recidivism rates. For example, in 2004-05, approximately 1,200 young offenders completed a YJC or received a caution, which resulted in 58% reoffending within the next five years.Analyse this statistic. What does this show? What's the purpose of including this statistic? Nevertheless, the criminal justice system uses the three-tiered system of diversionary processes in order for young offenders to achieve justice. This lacks a judgement. Is the statement you were provided highly accurate, partially accurate, or inaccurate?You could flesh out this argument with a more sophisticated discussion on warnings. i.e. Police discretion allows young offenders to avoid the court system. Children who undergo the court process are more likely to develop criminal tendencies etc etc..
Therefore, it is clear that the criminal justice system needs to treat young offenders differently in order for justice to be achieved. This has resulted in the notion of doli incapax, which considers the capacity for young offenders to recognise right from wrong, the Children’s Court which allows special provisions for young offenders and the three-tiered system of diversionary processes which allows children to have alternative sentences Lacks a final, conclusive judgement regarding the accuracy of the statement.
First off, a quick foreword that I tend to mark somewhat harsher than that of normal markers. Please don't take anything to heart, I'm a HSC student just like you and could easily have made some errors.
There you go, feedback is in red, suggestions are in blue. :)
Overall feedback:
Your topic sentence for every paragraph is the exact same, with only slight changes depending on what specifically you're talking about. While this helps you in terms of simplicity, it becomes way too mundane for the marker. I'll also mention that your thesis is lacking a judgement. The question is literally 'To what extent is this statement true?', so your entire essay is supposed to be whether you think it's true or not. Based off memory I only remember a handful of times where a judgement was explicitly mentioned. Also, your analysis of media articles and cases are far too short. These are supposed to be the backbone of your argument, so it needs to be discussed so much more. You could easily achieve this by cutting down on your content and focusing more on the analysis of cases. Furthermore, you tend to bring in the case in your second last sentence. If you were to introduce it in the middle or near the beginning, you could easily have a more sophisticated discussion of it.
Strong points would include your structure, which I believe is the ideal way to answer this question. The evidence you provide are great (but like I said, you lack an actual analysis of them). Also, you clearly understand your crime content.
I would give this essay a 9/15. Reason being is that it ticks all the boxes in that range. In order to reach the 10-12 range, specific areas to work on are:
-Making a judgement
-Analysis of evidence
-Legal terminology
-Reference the statement! Use quotes to show you're actually including it in your response.
Sure thing, send it through and I can have a look
Also, can I redo it again, and send it through to you to see if I'm made any improvements?
Hello there, i was wondering whats the best way to prepare for the world order essay for the HSC i'm assuming memorizing all the evidence and thank you.
Written under exam conditions, please dear god help. I can write a great English essay, but for some reason, not a legal essay. (Also, I typed up the written essay.) Thank you, thank you, thank you. Also, expect a law reform one soon and a family one. Thank you!
Also, is it now 50 posts? If so, how many more do i need now if I don't qualify for this one, or want to qualify for another one? Thank you
Hey Mary! Essay is attached with feedback in bold ;DSpoilerEvaluate The Effectiveness of the Criminal Trial Process as a Means of Achieving Justice:
The criminal trial process is an intricate and complex system that incorporates specific areas such as the jury system, complete and partial defences and the adversarial process. These elements attempt to achieve justice by trying to balance the rights of the offenders, victims and society. This introduction is fairly short, you'd prefer to have a smaller body and really setup your essay properly here!
The jury system attempts to achieve justice in the criminal trial process by its separation form the decision upon sentencing, and is governed by the Jury Act 1977 (NSW). How effective is it in this attempt? Make that judgement obvious from the start. The jury system attempts to balance the rights of the offenders, victims and society because it upholds the Doctrine of Natural Justice by granting the accuses the right to a fair hearing by an impartial judge and jury, juries draw strength and credibility from numbers by majority verdicts and the standard of proof, where someone is bound guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Very long sentence there - Use simple expression! Make concepts easy for your marker to follow! The jury system also attempts to achieve justice by catering for the needs of society by their ability to apply current community values and ethical standards as well as helping to remove bias through the jury deciding upon verdicts as oppose to judge along trials. Good - Again, simpler expression but the concept is solid. Perhaps a media article/quote to support your stance? However, whilst the jury system attempts to achieve justice by balancing the rights of victims, offenders and society, there is also a lack of effectiveness within the jury system. Despite juries attempting to eliminate bias, they may be inclined to be more emotional than judges as well as influenced by the media. Although jurors are instructed to base their verdicts only on evidence they hear in court, in a case where there has been a lot of media coverage, it may be very difficult for jurors to ignore the media and remain impartial. This would be a great place to include a media article, I know there has been a few on this issue! Impartiality is a fundamental right in the court system and its lack of representation in the trial denies the accused their rights and does not uphold the doctrine of natural justice and therefore, jury systems, whilst attempting to balance the rights of offenders, victims and society, do not always achieve justice. Good points raised! Be sure your paragraphs have a proper conclusion with a definitive evaluation to finish.
Defences to criminal charges can be classified as complete or partial and result in no conviction or a lesser conviction. Your marker knows this, you don't need definitions! These defences attempt to achieve justice for victims, offenders and society, however, do not always appropriately balance their needs. The complete defence of self defences requires a defendant to admit to committing the criminal offence, knowing it was wrong, but he/she claims to be acting to defend himself/herself/someone else from the attack. Ditto here, you don't need to define these aspects of your response, get straight into your analysis! Self defence attempts to achieve justice as people should be able to to protect themselves from harm (protection of individual rights) and can only be used if the force is necessary and reasonable, however, this defence cannot always be properly proved, resulting in an inadequate achievement of justice for victims. The R v. Silva case (2015) highlighted that self defence cannot always be accurately proved in the first attempt, who stabbed her boyfriend after abusive threats, violent and ice-addled rage imposed upon her. She was originally convicted of manslaughter however, she appealed the conviction, arguing she was acting in self defence and the NSW Court Of Criminal Appeal questioned her conviction. The initial conviction did not achieve justice of Silva and its lack of justice in the original riling did not balance Silva’s rights, tech criminal court only achieving justice for Silva after an appeal, if Silva did not have adequate access to legal representation in the appeal, she may have not had access to justice. This is an excellent case to use for your argument, but you've taken too long to break it down. It should be one to two sentences, brief case details, then "This case shows __________," to make your judgement straight away. Then immediately jump to your next example! The partial defence of provocation has been exploited in such manners that it no longer achieves justice for victims, offenders and society. Despite its ability to allow women who have suffered years of abuse to reduce their liability if they cause the death of the abuse, this defence has been used to legitimise lethal acts of domestic violence such as R v. Ramage (2004) and R v. Singh (2012), and does not achieve justice for victims. Fantastic! Both wives left their abusive husbands, Ramage and Singh, whom brutally murdered their wives. Singh murdered his wife by cutting her throat with a box cutter 23 times and was sentenced to only 8 years after pleading provocation. This is unnecessary detail, you've already made your argument! The community outrage at the killing being desired as ‘manslaughter’ and not ‘murder’ and the sentences length highlights that the exploitation of this defence does not achieve justice for victims and society, as society continues to question how a man who kills his wife in such circumstances can be entitled to even a partial defence to murder. It actually lead to a review of provocation as a defence, you might wish to mention that! Thus, completely and partial defences, whilst perhaps achieving justice for offenders does limit the justice achieved for society and victims, especially when these defences are brutally exploited. Overall, very solid paragraph - You could just be more succinct and more obvious with your judgements at times!
The adversarial process attempts to achieve justice by upholding the doctrine of natural justice, as it requires the individual right to an impartial jury, judge/magistrate and a right to a fair hearing. The adversarial system is effective for victims and offenders as both parties are heard and given the chance to represent their cases, thus, upholding the doctrine of natural justice. Good. The standards of evidence help remove hearsay and opinion by classifying evidence as admissible or inadmissible, granting the accused a fairer trial and by extent attempts to achieve justice. Try not to say 'attempts,' it makes you seem a little unsure about the argument! It DOES achieve justice! Cross examination in the adversarial system also allows the jury to see and hear both sides of a case, upholding the doctrine of natural justice. However, the adversarial system also is also lacking in effectiveness that inhibits its ability to achieve justice. Slightly awkward in expression here? The delay in cases, as a result of the lack of resource efficiency, inhibits its ability to achieve justice as “justice delayed is justice denied.” Be sure to reference where this quote has come from! Justice is rendered ineffective as equality and access can be absent in a case when one side can afford legal representation and one cannot. Thus, the side with more monetary abilities can afford the best lawyer which may manipulate the jury. Any statistics/media to support this statement? Thus, the lack of equality and access to legal representation inhibits the adversarial system’s ability to achiever justice.
Overall, the criminal trial process attempts to achieve justice by balancing the rights of victims, offenders and society, however the exploitation of certain areas of defences and the adversarial system inhibits its ability to achieve justice. One sentence conclusion isn't a huge deal but something more substantial would definitely be a good thing if you had the time!
This is definitely a strong response to a brutal question Mary!
- I like the way you've structured the response into well defined aspects of the Trial system, very easy to follow. Good work there ;D
- You've made attempts to make regular judgements, which is fantastic - Just be sure these arguments are deliberate and high modality. "DOES achieve justice," "DOESN'T achieve justice," etc etc. This is especially important in the first sentence, the judgement needs to be super clear and focused, even if that is a "halfway" argument.
- More varied evidence would be fantastic: You've got some legislation/cases, would love some media, some stats, some reports! In general you want 3-4 per paragraph at minimum, but this question is super specific so I didn't necessarily expect that here.
- Watch your expression, hard to follow in a few places :)
- You don't need definitions! Your markers are Legal teachers so they know what all the words mean ;D
I hope these comments are helpful for you! :) let me know if I can clarify anything for you!
Hey would you mind having a look at my essay for crime? i tried to do it under time conditions and i know its not the best, but would you mind outlining how i could cut it down a bit? Thanks heaps!
Hey would you mind having a look at my essay for crime? i tried to do it under time conditions and i know its not the best, but would you mind outlining how i could cut it down a bit? Thanks heaps!
Hey ! :)
Looks like you qualify for an essay marked. I wouldn't mind taking a look at it and giving you some feedback. Peer marking won't cost you anything, and it's quite beneficial for both of us :). I marked an essay not too long ago so you can check that out too! However, I completely understand if you'd prefer to have it marked by an actual ATARNotes lecturer. Let me know if you're fine with me marking it and I'll have a look ASAP
Cheers :D
Hey ! :)
Looks like you qualify for an essay marked. I wouldn't mind taking a look at it and giving you some feedback. Peer marking won't cost you anything, and it's quite beneficial for both of us :). I marked an essay not too long ago so you can check that out too! However, I completely understand if you'd prefer to have it marked by an actual ATARNotes lecturer. Let me know if you're fine with me marking it and I'll have a look ASAP
Cheers :D
Hey Jamon,
Thank you so much!!! I will definitely take notes and learn from your feedback! I just wanted to clarify, that my arguments need to be stronger and more definitive? I feel like that's my problem for all legal essays.
Question, how would you address a law reform question?
Cheers,
Mary
Hey thanks that would be great rodero! I can look at yours too if you wanted
Cheers
Hey ! :)
Looks like you qualify for an essay marked. I wouldn't mind taking a look at it and giving you some feedback. Peer marking won't cost you anything, and it's quite beneficial for both of us :). I marked an essay not too long ago so you can check that out too! However, I completely understand if you'd prefer to have it marked by an actual ATARNotes lecturer. Let me know if you're fine with me marking it and I'll have a look ASAP
Cheers :D
Hey rodero, just asking if you got the essay I remade earlier?
Awesome!Seriously THANKS SO MUCH rodero!!! I was feeling pretty bad about it, but now I can really see what I have to do. I feel like i write all of that 'fluff' when i'm still trying to work out what to say, but its made it heaps clearer now so THANKYOU!!
Evaluate the role of law reform in the criminal justice system
OriginalSpoilerLaw reform is imperative to the criminal justice system as it enables the law to continually reflect the changing moral and ethical standards in society, whilst responding to perceived failures of existing law and the rise of new technologies. As such law reform can allow for the greater protection of individual rights and enhance the effectiveness of criminal law. Recent reforms which have resulted from media and public pressure, however, have to a large extent resulted in greater protection for the community at the cost of individual rights. Thus, law reform whilst intrinsically linked to achieving an effective criminal justice system has been only partially effective.
Overtime law reform has played an essential role in the pursuit of equality and gaining a balance between police power and individual rights. This has led to a series of critical changes to the criminal investigation process. Specifically, prior to 2013, the rights of victims were not adequately recognised by the criminal investigation process, when criminal biker gangs would suddenly produce an alibi after the prosecution had spent months preparing for a case. This resulted in a substantial loss of resource with no justice realised for victims. Drafted with through a parliamentary committee and the assistance of police, the Evidence Amendment (Evidence of Silence) Act 2013 (NSW) was seen as an effective response to this perceived failure and allowed for improved resource efficiency and better recognition of the victim and communitys rights. Despite the best intentions of the reform, it was widely criticised with Law Society President Justin Down stating that a lack of community consultation had led to a poor law that failed to protect individual rights and had a negative impact on accused persons with limited knowledge of the criminal investigation process. This conveys that to be effective, law reform must consider all stake holders. Furthermore, it demonstrates the challenges of law reform in addressing the critical tension between protecting societys rights without on infringing on those of the accused. Despite the inadequacies of this law, law reform means that these can be addressed, so as to provide better outcomes for all of society.
Law reform has also played a key role with regard to bail, in an attempt to improve resource efficiency and better balance the rights of individuals and society. The introduction of the bail Act 2013 (NSW) was considered a necessary change as the previous Bail Act 1978 (NSW) had been amended over eighty times. Such extensive reform had led to extremely complex legislation that failed to provide the efficiency required for the criminal justice system to function effectively. The new Bail Act 2013 (NSW), introduced following a comprehensive report by the NSW Law Reform Commission, attempted to provide greater clarity and more consistent application of the law, whilst addressing the increasing rates of remand across NSW. It replaced the extensive list of presumptions for and against bail with an unacceptable risk test. Initially the reform was effective, leading to a decrease in remand levels, however, the case of Mohamoud Hawi in 2014, who received bail on murder charges and a series of other controversial cases conveys the influence of the media in instigating immediate reform, often with insufficient consultation. Despite Justice Harrison stating with regard to hawis case that the risks had been mitigated by imposing strict conditions, immense media pressure form radio shock jocks and tabloid newspapers led to the introduction of show cause measures for serious criminal charges. Despite the changes providing greater protection for society, thy limited the judges discretion as well as significantly implicating the presumption of innocence, a fundamental legal right. The subsequent increase in remand levels conveys that the reform has not been effective in addressing key issues. These amendments indicate the success of law reform within the criminal justice system is dependent on measured considered research and recommendations form relevant legal bodies rather than calls for reform by the media.
Law reform has also been pivotal within the sentencing process of the criminal justice system. Reforms to this area, as governed by the Crimes (Sentencing and Procedures) Act 1999 (NSW) are highly important as they largely determine how offenders will be treated and reintegrated into society. Principally, for sentences to be just for the victim, offender and society, they must enable judicial discretion to be exercised. The case of R v Loveridge (2013) where Loveridge was imprisoned and charged with manslaughter led to major reform to sentencing. This was driven by media outrage at his original sentence of five years and 2 months. Minimum mandatory sentences for causing death with a single strike were introduced less than 3 months later, also making it mandatory for intoxication to be an aggravating factor. The reform was considered effective as it improves justice for the victim and acts as a general deterrent. Despite this, the Law Council was critical of the amendment, stating that mandatory imprisonment will lead to the individual engaging in more serious criminal acts down the track. Furthermore, the reforms remove judicial discretion and further impact the rights of the offender, which could result in less responsive and suitable sentencing and punishment from being achieved. Consequently law reform has to an extent been effective within this area of the criminal justice system.
An evaluation of the impact of law reform into the above areas of the criminal justice system conveys that reform is the most effective mechanism in addressing key issues that arise from criminal law. These reforms, whilst failing to provide greater protections for offenders and the accused have responded to societys calls for harsher legislation, so as to recognise the rights of the victim and the community. In this respect, law reform has successfully reflected societys changing ethical and moral standards. It must be noted, however, that Law reform is fundamental to the criminal justice system, so that more effective, just outcomes for the victim, offender and society may eventually be realised.
With feedbackSpoilerLaw reform is imperative to the criminal justice system as it enables the law to continually reflect the changing moral and ethical standardsinof society, whilst responding toperceived failures of existing law andthe rise of new technologies and perceived failures of existing law. Solid thesis; good integration of the theme/challenge as well. I swapped the second half of the sentence to help with expression and flow As such law reform can allow for the greater protection of individual rights and enhance the effectiveness of criminal law. Recent reforms which have resulted from media and public pressure, however, have to a large extent resulted in greater protection for the community at the cost of individual rights. In light of the past two sentences, it looks as though what you're saying is that law reform can protect individual rights, but at times it can prioritise the community instead? A statement like that could be communicated much more succinctly through the inclusion of the whole 'balancing the rights of victims, offenders and society' phrase. Another note would be that you haven't mentioned what you're talking about. While what you say about law reform has been great, you're completely missing the second half of the question; that is, 'the criminal justice system'. This means that if you want to answer all aspects of the question in your introduction, then you need to bring up your key points such as bail, rights of suspects, and statutory guidelines The significance of law reform in addressing the diverse nature of criminal law is evident through amendments to the rights of suspects, bail and statutory guidelines That's just an example off the top of my head and is no means perfect, but the idea is that you bring in the topic of your paragraphs in the introduction, so that the marker knows from the get-go what it is you'll be writing about Thus, law reform whilst intrinsically linked to achieving an effective criminal justice system has been only partially effective.You're starting to get sidetracked here. The question is 'evaluate the ROLE of law reform',
not 'evaluate the EFFECTIVENESS of law reform'. So your essay shouldn't be focused on whether or not it's been effective (though you can mention it a few times), instead it should say something along the lines of.. Thus, law reform is essential for the achievement of justice, so plays a highly significant role in the criminal justice systemlOvertimeOver time, law reform has played an essential role in the pursuit of equalityand gaining a balance between police power and individual rightsin relation to the rights of suspects.I would remove the 'police powers and individual rights' part and swap it in for 'rights of suspects'. Reason being is that when I first read this paragraph I thought that you were going to be talking about law reform regarding police powers, which is a different dot point - once I finished reading I realised it was on the rights of suspects instead. This has led to a series of critical changes to the criminal investigation process. This is a bit of unnecessary fluff; it's contributing to your word count and time, but it isn't really adding anything to your essay. You're more than welcome to delete this sentence completely, just make sure you get rid of the 'specifically' in your next sentence Specifically, prior to 2013, the rights of victims were not adequately recognisedbyin the criminal investigation process, when criminal biker gangs would suddenly produce an alibi after the prosecution had spent months preparing for a case. This resulted in a substantial loss of resource with no justice realised for victims.Drafted with through a parliamentary committee and the assistance of police,I might seem a bit harsh but like I said before, this extra fluff isn't grabbing you any extra marks. In reality, if you got rid of all of the unnecessary words you could easily fit an extra bit of evidence to strengthen your argument in relation to the question The Evidence Amendment (Evidence of Silence) Act 2013 (NSW) was seen as an effective response to this perceived failure and allowed for improved resource efficiency and better recognition of the victim and communitys rights.The analysis here is all well and good, though it could benefit with a tiny description about what this amendment actually did i.e The Evidence Amendment (Evidence of Silence) Act 2013 (NSW) allowed the jury to draw a "guilty inference" when the accused brings new evidence that was not said during questioning. This demonstrates that law reform plays a highly significant role in the criminal justice system, as it is integral for the achievement of resource efficiency and facilitates a better recognition of the rights of the victim and society Despite the best intentions of the reform, it was widely criticised with Law Society President Justin Down stating that a lack of community consultation had led to a poor law thatfailed to protect individual rights anddeleted to avoid repetition. Individual rights and the rights of the accused are virtually the same thing in this context had a negative impact on accused persons with limited knowledge of the criminal investigation process. This conveys that to be effective, law reform must consider allstake holdersmembers of society Personally I'm a bit iffy on the use of the word 'stakeholders' in a legal studies context. It just seems more of a business term to me. Even then, the sentence sounds a bit clunky when said aloud. Furthermore, it demonstrates the challenges of law reform in addressing the critical tension between protecting societys rights withoutoninfringingonthose of the accused. Despite the inadequacies of this law, law reform means that these can be addressed, so as to provide better outcomes for all of society. This sentence is a bit confusing. It just seems like a sudden jump from 'allowing for resource efficiency' to calling it 'inadequate'.
In any case, this linking sentence isn't going back to the actual question. You need to finish this paragraph up with your judgement. i.e. Does law reform play a highly significant role, an insignificant role, etc.
Law reform has also played a key role with regard to bail, in an attempt to improve resource efficiency and better balance the rights of individuals and society.This is a good thesis statement. Try to reciprocate it throughout your essay The introduction of thebBail Amendment Act 2013 (NSW) was considered a necessary change as the previous Bail Act 1978 (NSW) had been amended over eighty times to no success I don't see the correlation between being amended several times and needing to be amended again? For expression sake, I've added a few extra words. Such extensive reform had led to extremely complex legislation that failed to provide the efficiency required for the criminal justice system to function effectively. The new Bail Act 2013 (NSW), introduced following a comprehensive report by the NSW Law Reform Commission, attempted to provide greater clarity and more consistent application of the law, whilst addressing the increasing rates of remand across NSW. It replaced the extensive list of presumptions for and against bail with an unacceptable risk test.This sentence is the only real bit of explanation that you need. If you got rid of the previous sentences, you could delve into a discussion of Man Monis and how he commit the Lindt Cafe Siege while on bail. Initially the reform was effective, leading to a decrease in remand levels, however, the case of Mohamoud Hawi in 2014, who received bail on murder charges and a series of other controversial cases conveys the influence of the media in instigating immediate reform, often with insufficient consultation. Despite Justice Harrison stating with regard to hawis case that the risks had been mitigated by imposing strict conditions, immense media pressure form radio shock jocks and tabloid newspapers led to the introduction of show cause measures for serious criminal charges. Your analysis needs to include your judgement in relation to the question Despite the changes providing greater protection for society, thy limited the judges discretion as well as significantly implicating the presumption of innocence, a fundamental legal right. The subsequent increase in remand levels conveys that the reform has not been effective in addressing key issues. These amendments indicate the success of law reform within the criminal justice system is dependent on measured considered research and recommendations form relevant legal bodies rather than calls for reform by the media.Again, this linking statement is cluttered with a lot of ideas, though it still fails to answer the question. i.e. These amendments highlight that law reform has a profound impact on the criminal justice system. What you had in the topic sentence was a good thesis
Law reform has also been pivotal within the sentencing process of the criminal justice system. Reforms to this area, as governed by the Crimes (Sentencing and Procedures) Act 1999 (NSW) are highly important as they largely determine how offenders will be treated and reintegrated into society. Principally, for sentences to be just for the victim, offender and society, they must enable judicial discretion to be exercised. The case of R v Loveridge (2013) where Loveridge was imprisoned and charged with manslaughter led to major reform to sentencing. This was driven by media outrage at his original sentence of five years and 2 months. Minimum mandatory sentences for causing death with a single strike were introduced less than 3 months later, also making it mandatory for intoxication to be an aggravating factor. Cite the amendment - the Crimes (Assault and Intoxication) Act. In a law reform question it is CRUCIAL that you actually cite the amendmentThe reform was considered effective as it improves justice for the victim and acts as a general deterrent.Like I said before, you've been asked for how significant of a ROLE law reform plays in the CJS, not how effective it is Despite this, the Law Council was critical of the amendment, stating that mandatory imprisonment will lead to the individual engaging in more serious criminal acts down the track. Furthermore, the reforms remove judicial discretion and further impact the rights of the offender, which could result in less responsive and suitable sentencing and punishment from being achieved. Consequently law reform has to an extent been effective within this area of the criminal justice system.Previous feedback relates to here as well
An evaluation of the impact of law reform into the above areas of the criminal justice system conveys that reform is the most effective mechanism in addressing key issues that arise from criminal law. These reforms, whilst failing to provide greater protections for offenders and the accused have responded to societys calls for harsher legislation, so as to recognise the rights of the victim and the community. In this respect, law reform has successfully reflected societys changing ethical and moral standards. It must be noted, however, that Law reform is fundamental to the criminal justice system, so that more effective, just outcomes for the victim, offender and society may eventually be realised.
Conclusively, law reform has a highly significant role in the criminal justice system. These amendments attempt to adapt to the dynamic nature of society's ethical standards through changes to legislation pertaining to the rights of suspects. Likewise, the recent bail amendments demonstrate to a large extent, the ramifications that ineffective reforms have on the wider populace. Finally, law reform regarding statutory guidelines is highly significant, as the proposed changes severely restrict judicial discretion. Thus, it is clear that law reform has a significant role in the criminal justice system
First off, a quick foreword that I tend to mark somewhat harsher than that of normal markers. Please don't take anything to heart, I'm a HSC student just like you and could easily have made some errors.
Without any further ado, comments are in red, suggestions are in blue :)
General feedback:
You definitely raise some valid points regarding law reform and how it may affect the community. You've also been able to weave in some additional themes and challenges, which is great. However, there are major issues regarding the fact that you're getting sidetracked in your analysis and judgement. The question is asking for a judgement on the ROLE of law reform, not the EFFECTIVENESS of it. That being said, there have only been TWO instances throughout the entire essay where you explicitly used the word 'role', which means your ability to explicitly answer the question is severely limited.
Another note would be the fact that there is too much fluff. What I mean by fluff is words that make the essay look 'fuller' than it actually is. These fluff statements don't reward you with any extra marks, since the marker isn't getting anything out of them. You tend to have a lot of fluff in your elaboration. By culling these statements, you would then be able to introduce more cases, more media, more legislation etc. to prove your point.
My last point of feedback would be that you are introducing your law reform too late into the paragraph. The question is purely centered around the role of law reform, so the amendment must be cited much, much earlier. In your final paragraph for instance, it was only until halfway through your paragraph that the amendment was referenced
With all of these pointers, I do need to commend you on your strengths. Undeniably, you know your crime content, which will work wonders for you as Crime is such a big topic. Also, you have a fairly strong grasp on legal terminology, and you're able to weave them properly throughout the essay.
Overall, I'd give this essay a 10/15 - you have the 'sound knowledge' to get into that 10-12 range, but unfortunately your judgement was in relation to the EFFECTIVENESS of law reform, not the ROLE of law reform. As well as this, too much fluff in your paragraphs detracted from the amount of evidence and analysis that could be used.
If nobody has gotten to you yet, I can mark it sometime tonight
YAY FIRST EVER ESSAY MARKED ON ATAR NOTES!!!!!
I was wondering if anyone could pretty please mark my own essay on the criminal trial process. I hope it sounds alright, I haven't been feeling well lately so study has been a struggle buuuut I finally managed to do this ;D surprisingly, wording my arguments were more of a challenge than I thought so fingers crossed they came through all right!
Thank you!
EDIT: I am happy to have this marked by anyone, Elyse, Jamon, rodero, anyone :)SpoilerAssess the effectiveness of the criminal trial process as a means of achieving justice.
The criminal trial process has been a reasonably effective means of achieving justice through the creation of measures to meet the needs of victims, offenders and society. Justice is enabled when the balance of rights of all parties in the criminal trial process is achieved to the best of the criminal justice system’s ability, particularly through the use of juries, allowing charge negotiation, and ensuring all evidence is received and used impartially and fairly.
The use of a jury system plays a vital role in being a significantly effective source of achieving justice within the criminal trial process. A jury is able to reflect society’s needs in the decisions they make, rather than the criminal trial be solely handled from a judicial point of view. The Jury Act 1912 (NSW) brought the initial use of the jury into the criminal trial process, later amended by the Jury Act 1977 (NSW), which extended definitions and outlined further sections to the Act to ensure the system is not abused. However, prior to the Jury Amendment (Verdicts) Act 2006 NSW, verdicts made by juries had to be unanimous. This law reform was extraordinary in allowing even greater justice to come out of the jury system by preventing cases of a rogue juror purposely dissenting against the rest of the jury for their own personal interest rather than for the greater good of the community. The importance of allowing majority verdicts was seen in the case of the Lin Family Murders, where after four trials as a result of hung juries, Robert Xie was found guilty in early 2017 through a 11-1 majority verdict. This case may not have been able to be closed if the reform did not happen, and thus justice would not have been achieved for the victims, or society. The jury system, and in particular the reforms that have allowed majority verdicts have been undoubtedly effective in achieving justice for all parties within the criminal trial process.
The criminal trial process must also take into account the right of offenders when proceedings take place to ensure justice is achieved for all. Legislation embedded in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) has been a reasonably effective means of achieving justice by assuring actions taken are fair for all parties in a criminal trial. Section 138 of the act outlines that evidence must be legally obtained for it to be admissible in court. However, whilst this may create fairness, the outcome may not always be seen as correct by victims or society. This can be seen in the case of R v Atkins, where the evidence on police tapes were “ruled as inadmissible evidence, as police at the time had not informed him he was a suspect,” as stated in an article by the ABC in 2016. As a result of the limited amount evidence given through this and Atkins refusal to give evidence of his own, he was acquitted by the jury of the murder and manslaughter of Matthew Leveson. Near a decade later it was still unclear how Leveson was killed, therefore Atkins was “granted a certificate under section 61 of the Coroner’s Act which allowed him immunity from prosecution,” to lead police to the body of Leveson, where he was found, the article continued to say. Legislation created surrounding the use of evidence within the criminal trial process may cause some proceedings to seem morally wrong to victims and society. However, the protections entrenched in this guarantees the rights of all parties are protected, and thus justice is achieved.
Charge negotiation has been a partially effective measure in achieving justice, particularly for victims, within the criminal trial process. Injustice within cases may arise from a variety of factors including inequality in the level of accreditation and experience within representation due to socio-economic status, or the incorrect dealing with evidence during the criminal investigation process as mentioned, and thus it can result in the untruthful decision eventually being made. Charge negotiation has been created to ensure justice can be achieved more efficiently and effectively during the criminal trial process. According to the New South Wales Law Reform Commission’s report 147, 83% of all criminal matters in the District Court of New South wales are resolved by a guilty plea, and charge negotiation has played a substantial role in generating this statistic. Section 35A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment Act 2010 (NSW) outlines the procedures of charge negotiation, including the need for the DPP to sign a certificate to say that not only the victim, but also the police officer in charge have seen the agreed statement of facts. This protection ensures that prosecutors are not entering into agreements for their own reputation, and are instead putting achieving justice for the victim as their first priority. Reaching a guilty plea early on in the criminal trial process spares the trauma the victim may have had to go through otherwise, and guarantees that a suitable punishment will be handed down to the offender in accordance with Section 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure Act). However, charge negotiation may not always have this justly outcome. As a part of the negotiation, the charge is likely to be down graded, meaning the offender may receive a lighter punishment than if the criminal trial process was to take place in its entirety. Judge Berman mentioned in an article by the Daily Telegraph in 2016 that “It is a fundamental part of a proper criminal justice system that offenders are sentenced for what they have actually done and a sentencing judge should never be misled in assessing the criminality of a particular offender’s conduct.” Therefore, whilst charge negotiation has the ability of being an effective means of achieving justice within the criminal trial process, it opportunity for verdicts to end up lighter on offenders than it morally should can cause an injustice for victims.
The role and reform of the jury system, and the purposes of charge negotiation have been effective in achieving justice, however there are chances for fault. Although, their ability to create justice whilst balancing the rights and needs of victims, offenders and society has been significant, and thus the process has been relatively effective in achieving justice.
Sorry for the delay! Had a busy day yesterday :)
Assess the effectiveness of the criminal trial process as a means of achieving justice.
Essay with feedbackSpoilerThe criminal trial process has been a reasonably effective means of achieving justice through the creation of measures to meet the needs of victims,offendersthe accused, and society. Great thesis! The only change I'd recommend is that you say 'the accused' instead of offenders. We're currently in the trial process, so they haven't been found guilty yet Justice is enabled when the balance of rights of all parties in the criminal trial process is achieved to the best of the criminal justice system’s ability, particularly through the use of juries, allowing charge negotiation, and ensuring all evidence is received and used impartially and fairly. I understand that you want to keep the intro short to save time, but it would be ideal if you could add a few more sentences here. Reason being is that you need to set up a strong argument from the get-go. You've done a great job with your thesis statement but try to elaborate on it some more. Why has it only been reasonably effective? What's working, and what's not?
The use of a jury system plays a vital role in being a significantly effective source of achieving justice within the criminal trial process.Great!
Try to keep your other thesis statements like this A jury is able to reflect society’s needs in the decisions they make, rather than the criminal trial be solely handled from a judicial point of view.Nice! The Jury Act 1912 (NSW) brought the initial use of the jury into the criminal trial process, later amended by the Jury Act 1977 (NSW), which extended definitions and outlined further sections to the Act to ensure the system is not abused.This history of the jury system isn't doing much for you. I mean sure, it counts as legislation so technically it adds to your essay. However, it's fairly weak. Your statement about how the jury system can reflect the values of society, together with the 2006 amendment is enough.However, prior to the Jury Amendment (Verdicts) Act 2006 NSW, verdicts made by juries had to be unanimous.You haven't really told me what the amendment actually did, you only really said what the legislation was like before the amendment The Jury Amendment (Verdicts) Act 2006 NSW allows for a verdict of 10:2 and a 11:1 to satisfy a conviction, rather than the previous unanimous vote. This law reform was extraordinary in allowing even greater justice to come out of the jury system by preventing cases of a rogue juror purposely dissenting against the rest of the jury for their own personal interest rather than for the greater good of the community.This is a very bold statement - I'd recommend that you have a statistic such as the amount of hung juries prior to the amendment in order to prove this. The importance of allowing majority verdicts was seen in the case of the Lin Family Murders, where after four trials as a result of hung juries, Robert Xie was found guilty in early 2017 through a 11-1 majority verdict. This case may not have been able to be closed if the reform did not happen, and thus justice would not have been achieved for the victims, or society. Refer to my comment below - was justice actually achieved?The jury system, and in particular the reforms that have allowed majority verdicts have been undoubtedly effective in achieving justice for all parties within the criminal trial process. I think that your overall argument is a bit limiting. First off, I'll say that the jury system isn't all that great, and I'd like to see you discuss that in your essay. The 2006 amendment, while allowing for less hung juries, hampers the rights of the accused as the standard of proof is decreased. Furthermore, the case of R v Xie is considered to be the longest murder trial in NSW history. Think about the emotional trauma that the witnesses had to relive as a result of all the retrials, and the millions of dollars that taxpayers (society) had to fork up. So in actuality, it's fairly inaccurate to classify it as 'highly' effective - I'd rather you say partial, just so that it's in line with the argument you produced in your intro. A bit of nuance shows much more sophistication as well. Another point would be jury misconduct - the issue of juries attempting to find the facts of the case outside of trial. Mainly seen in R v Skaf and R v Karakaya. You could remove some of the history of the Jury Act that you can fit this in
The criminal trial process must also take into account the right of offenders when proceedings take place to ensure justice is achieved for all. Legislation embedded in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) has been a reasonably effective means of achieving justice by assuring actions taken are fair for all parties in a criminal trial.I'd prefer if you rejigged the past two sentences a bit. Mainly, move the 'reasonably effective' into your first sentence so that your thesis is actually answering the question Section 138 of the act outlines that evidence must be legally obtained for it to be admissible in court. However, whilst this may create fairness, the outcome may not always be seen as correct by victims or society. This can be seen in the case of R v Atkins, where the evidence on police tapes were “ruled as inadmissible evidence, as police at the time had not informed him he was a suspect,” as stated in an article by the ABC in 2016. As a result of the limited amount evidence given through this and Atkins refusal to give evidence of his own, he was acquitted by the jury of the murder and manslaughter of Matthew Leveson. Near a decade later it was still unclear how Leveson was killed, therefore Atkins was “granted a certificate under section 61 of the Coroner’s Act which allowed him immunity from prosecution,” to lead police to the body of Leveson, where he was found, the article continued to say. This is a hefty description of a single case. Try to be a bit more succinct so that you can relate it to the question much quicker In the case of R v Atkins, highly incriminating police tapes were ruled as inadmissible evidence, thus allowing him to be acquitted of murder. It was only a decade later and through an "immunity from prosecution" (ABC 2016) deal with Atkins that the body could be found and solace delivered to the grieving family members. Legislation created surrounding the use of evidence within the criminal trial process may cause some proceedings to seem morally wrong to victims and society. However, the protections entrenched in this guarantees the rights of all parties are protected, and thus justice is achieved to a partial extent. just make sure that your linking statement finishes up with your judgement in relation to the question
Charge negotiation has been a partially effective measure in achieving justice, particularly for victims, within the criminal trial process. Injustice within cases may arise from a variety of factors including inequality in the level of accreditation and experience within representation due to socio-economic status, or the incorrect dealing with evidence during the criminal investigation process as mentioned, and thus it can result in the untruthful decision eventually being made. Charge negotiation has been created to ensure justice can be achieved more efficiently and effectively during the criminal trial process.Good According to the New South Wales Law Reform Commission’s report 147, 83% of all criminal matters in the District Court of New South wales are resolved by a guilty plea, and charge negotiation has played a substantial role in generating this statistic. Section 35A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment Act 2010 (NSW) outlines the procedures of charge negotiation, including the need for the DPP to sign a certificate to say that not only the victim, but also the police officer in charge have seen the agreed statement of facts. This protection ensures that prosecutors are not entering into agreements for their own reputation, and are instead putting achieving justice for the victim as their first priority. This heavy recount doesn't contribute muchReaching a guilty plea early on in the criminal trial process spares the trauma the victim may have had to go through otherwise, and guarantees that a suitable punishment will be handed down to the offender in accordance with Section 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure Act). However, charge negotiation may not always have this justly outcome. As a part of the negotiation, the charge is likely to be down graded, meaning the offender may receive a lighter punishment than if the criminal trial process was to take place in its entirety. Bring in R v Loveridge -> Murder charge is reduced to manslaughter. Lots of public outcry, particularly from the victim's mother Judge Berman mentioned in an article by the Daily Telegraph in 2016 that “It is a fundamental part of a proper criminal justice system that offenders are sentenced for what they have actually done and a sentencing judge should never be misled in assessing the criminality of a particular offender’s conduct.” Therefore, whilst charge negotiation has the ability of being an effective means of achieving justice within the criminal trial process, it opportunity for verdicts to end up lighter on offenders than it morally should can cause an injustice for victims. Hence, charge negotiation is only partially effective in achieving justice in the criminal trial process
The role and reform of the jury system, and the purposes of charge negotiation have been effective in achieving justice, however there are chances for fault.AlthoughHowever, their ability to create justice whilst balancing the rights and needs of victims,offendersthe accused and society has been significant, and thus the trial process has been relatively effective in achieving justice. Good :) Like the intro though, I'd like to see this extended so that you can really elaborate on everything and drive the argument home
Comments in red, suggestions in blue :)
General feedback:
Overall I'd say that it's a fairly strong essay. Your integration of legislation, cases and media are great and your judgement is clear. At times however, you introduce a point and don't really link it back to how this demonstrates the effectiveness of the measure. Try not to just top and tail your judgement but have it persistent throughout. Also try to work on being a lot more succinct. There are major bits of description here that could easily be cut down. This will help you substantially as it allows for the introduction of extra cases, allowing you to show a bit more nuance in your response. I don't think you've really done much in your second body paragraph. I'd recommend that you take up my suggested wording so that you can fit in an extra case. Either that, or swap 'evidence' out for something that has more to talk about, such as defences
I'd give this essay a 12/15, though it's nearing a 13/15 - solid effort, good job :)
Doesn't look like it ! Feel free to send it through one more time :)
Sent it through!
Hey :)
Sorry but there might be a bit of a delay in getting the feedback to you! I really need time to buckle down as it's the final week until Paper 1.
Out of curiosity, however, I did have a read through your new essay. Can I just say, it really brings me joy to see people making massive improvements - it's part of why I offer to peer mark in the first place ! Your essay has improved exponentially, and I think you should be proud of it.
I'll get to specific feedback when I can, good luck with the HSC :)