Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime. Others, however, argue that the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Response
In recent years, there has been a rise in the number of crimes being committed. Many people are of the opinion that these wrong-doings should be classified categorically. However, I believe that each offence should be looked upon in a subjective manner, taking into account the nature and severity of these unlawful activities. Giving a fixed punishment would definitely make court proceedings a lot quicker. This is because the judges would not need to decide what type of punishment criminals would deserve as it would have been already decided for them. However, this is an unfair practice as some of the criminals may not deserve the punishments given to them. For example, a person robbing a convenient store will not deserve the same punishment as a person robbing a bank because the degree of the crime is not as severe as the latter. On the other hand, deciding a crime according to the situation and motive of it makes perfect sense as it would ensure that the lawbreaker is given a fair trial and the right punishment is handed down to him. For instance, a mentally ill person who commits a murder would be judged accordingly, instead of being grouped into the same category of all the other type of murderers. This, therefore, will make the trial balance and fair. In conclusion, my opinion is that the punishment for a crime should be made up based on all the factors leading up to the unlawful action rather than providing judgement based on the classification of crimes into types.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Standard form Original: wrong-doings Suggested revision: offences Why it matters: Offences is more precise in a legal essay.
- 2. Tautology Original: classified categorically Suggested revision: assigned fixed penalties by category Why it matters: The original repeats the same idea without explaining it.
- 3. Concise wording Original: looked upon in a subjective manner Suggested revision: assessed individually Why it matters: This is clearer and more direct.
- 4. Tense sequence Original: would deserve as it would have been already decided Suggested revision: deserve because it would already have been decided Why it matters: Place already between the auxiliary and participle.
- 5. Wrong noun Original: convenient store Suggested revision: convenience store Why it matters: Convenience store is the correct term.
- 6. Hypothetical form Original: will not deserve Suggested revision: may not deserve Why it matters: May is appropriate for a general possibility.
- 7. Weak offence comparison Original: same punishment as a person robbing a bank Suggested revision: same sentence as an armed bank robber Why it matters: The severity difference needs to be made explicit.
- 8. Legal collocation Original: degree of the crime Suggested revision: severity of the offence Why it matters: This is the precise legal phrase.
- 9. Faulty comparison Original: not as severe as the latter Suggested revision: less severe in the first case Why it matters: The original compares a crime with a person.
- 10. Wrong object Original: deciding a crime Suggested revision: deciding a punishment Why it matters: Courts determine punishment, not the crime.
- 11. Natural reference Original: motive of it Suggested revision: motive behind it Why it matters: Motive behind is the standard phrase.
- 12. Inclusive reference Original: handed down to him Suggested revision: handed down to them Why it matters: Use a gender-neutral pronoun for a general offender.
Suggested Rewrites
- wrong-doings offences
- classified categorically assigned fixed penalties by category
- looked upon in a subjective manner assessed individually
- would deserve as it would have been already decided deserve because it would already have been decided
- convenient store convenience store
- will not deserve may not deserve
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response discusses both approaches, gives a clear preference for case-specific sentencing, and supports each side with relevant examples. Its argument would be stronger with deeper examination of the benefits of consistency and some correction of imprecise legal vocabulary and grammar; prioritise balanced development and more exact comparisons between offences, circumstances, and culpability.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Detailed feedback by IELTS writing criterion after the annotated essay.
Task Response
Both views and a clear opinion are addressed, with relevant examples, though the fixed-punishment view is developed only briefly.
Add a second reason for fixed penalties, then explain why proportionality and mitigating circumstances outweigh that benefit.
Coherence and Cohesion
The sequence is clear and cohesive, although the essay is presented as one block and some reference chains are awkward.
Use separate paragraphs for each view and reserve the final paragraph for the position.
Lexical Resource
Legal vocabulary is generally appropriate, but several word choices and collocations are inaccurate.
Use precise phrases such as 'convenience store', 'circumstances and motive' and 'determine a sentence'.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A range of complex forms is used, but comparative structures, agreement and participles contain noticeable errors.
Check every comparison for a clear subject and use correct adjective forms after linking verbs.