MedVision ad

asses effectiveness of adverserial system - ESSAY (1 Viewer)

lolitsme

New Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
12
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
I got this essay and i need some ideas and tips. Here is the essay question.

Asses the effectiveness of the adversarial system in achieving justice for the individual and society in criminal trials.
What should i write about and how should i structure my essay?
should i address the positives of the adverserial system in the beginning and the negatives at the end?
OR should i compare the FOR and AGAINST together instead of spreading them?
thanks :fish::fish:
 

CheesePlease

Cheese Dreams!
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
123
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
- Give positives and negatives.
- Make your own judgment on whether you think it is a fair and just way of doing things for both the individual and society as a whole. Perhaps include some of your own recommendations on how it could be improved.
- Briefly compare it to the inquisitorial system, pass judgment on which one you think is better and why.

You should be able to get enough down by focusing on those points.
 

CheesePlease

Cheese Dreams!
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
123
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
And as with all essays, don't lose sight of the question, keep referring back to it in your response.

Also, if you can try and give direct examples, it may be tough with this question as it is essentially just assessing your knowledge of how the Adversarial system operates and depending on your word limit it may infeasible to waste precious words on examples.

The most prominent example I can think of off the top of my head is the Schapelle Corby case a few years back where she was trialed under what is basically an inquisitorial system. Would justice have been achieved if Indonesia used the adversarial system? That might be an interesting case to look at.
 

b00m

Active Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
2,776
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
Uni Grad
2014
I remmber reading how the very notion of the adversarial system promotes inequality. Why? Because the quality of the evidence does not matter.. rather it depends on the quality of the argument presented, where this is influenced by the ability of a lawyer ... [in turn, this is influenced by one's socio-economic status, employment capacity]
 

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

Top