There has been much discussion revolving around
the issue of punishment to culprit. An increasing number of people tend to uphold that the circumstances of commited
crime and also the motivation should be taken into account on the final judgment instead of fixed punishments for each type of crime.
It is obvious that a
stereotypical penalty simplifies
the judicial process. By that I mean each type of crime is corresponding to definite punishment. For instance, if one murders a
will be punished by life sentence or capital punishment regardless of circumstances
, motivation and so forth. To some extent, it is likely that this way of safeguarding social is sensible on execute national law.
In fact, the
fixed punishment overly emphasizes the crime and ignores people (involved
maybe); therefore some innocent people may be punished unjustly, which will arouse remaining problems. There may be some reasons why these people discarded their former
to commit a
n other words, what were their motivations? (it is recommended to avoid using question type sentences in IELTS essays)
Undeniable, they are, essentially, crucial factors on deciding which type of penalty should be
to different culprits.
, motivation and other factors should be taken into account. It is inevitable
that the judicative process prolong depends
on the complexity of the case. Instead of this, many people who are innocents
such as children, are
being advantaged and self-defensed
person can receive reasonable judgment, while some bribery administrative officials
against the law should receive severe punishments
due to their
On the basis of the above discussion, I personally think, it is reasonable to consider the situation of the
crime rather than the
fixed punishment when deciding the finally judgment.