This IELTS Writing Task 2 post offers some sample answers to an agree-disagree topic. This agree-disagree topic asks the candidates to provide arguments as to whether new science related to criminal forensics should be used to look at old cases or not. In this post, you will find three great model answers which may help you develop your own answers for other agree-disagree topics.

Let’s have look at the question first.  

Some believe that new science related to criminal forensics should be used to look at old cases.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample 1: Band 8 (disagree point)

The use of new science related to criminal forensics in old cases has been a topic of discussion in recent years. Some believe that it can provide new evidence and information that can help to uncover the truth and bring closure to families. However, I strongly disagree with the notion that new science should be used to re-examine old cases.

One of the main reasons for my disagreement is the potential for bias and subjective interpretations of the evidence. New science and technology can provide new information, but it can also lead to subjective interpretations of the evidence. This can result in false conclusions and can lead to further confusion and speculation about the case. Furthermore, the use of new science in old cases can also open up the possibility of wrongful convictions, which can cause harm to individuals and their families.

Another reason for my disagreement is the potential for the revictimization of families and individuals. Reopening old cases and exposing them to new evidence and new interpretations can cause emotional distress for those who have already suffered as a result of the crime. The process of re-examining old cases can also bring new scrutiny and attention to individuals who have moved on from the event and may not be prepared to deal with it again.

In conclusion, I believe that the use of new science in old cases should be approached with caution. While it has the potential to provide new information and evidence, it can also lead to subjective interpretations and false conclusions. The use of new science in old cases can also result in the revictimization of individuals and families who have already suffered. It is important to weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of using new science in old cases and to ensure that it is used in a manner that is fair and impartial.

(309 words)

Sample 2: Band 7 (agree point)

The use of new science in criminal forensics to examine old cases has become a topic of great interest and debate. Those who support this approach believe that it has the potential to provide new evidence and information that can bring closure to families and restore confidence in the justice system. In my view, I wholeheartedly agree that new science should be used to re-examine old cases.

One of the benefits of using new science in old cases is that it can provide a second chance for justice. Advances in DNA analysis, for example, have led to the exoneration of individuals who were wrongly convicted. This can bring closure to families who have suffered for years without knowing the truth and restore public confidence in the justice system. Furthermore, new science can also help to identify the real culprits, increasing the likelihood of justice being served.

Another advantage of using new science in old cases is that it can bring new light to cases that have already been closed. The implementation of new technology in investigating old crimes can provide new information and evidence that was previously missed. This can help to provide answers for families and bring closure to long-standing cases. Moreover, it can bring new insights into the crime and the motive behind it, leading to a better understanding of the case.

In conclusion, I firmly believe that the use of new science in old cases can provide a second chance for justice and help to uncover new evidence and information. The implementation of new science in old cases should be done in a responsible manner and with a thorough analysis of the evidence. This will ensure that justice is served and that the use of new science in old cases is done in a manner that is fair and impartial. New science has the potential to bring closure to families, restore public confidence in justice to families, and bring a new understanding to long-standing cases.

(328 words)

Sample 3: Band 6 (agree point)

The use of new science related to criminal forensics in old cases has been a topic of discussion in recent years. Those in favour of this approach argue that it can provide a second chance for justice and help to uncover new evidence and information. In my opinion, I firmly believe that new science should be used to re-examine old cases.

One of the benefits of using new science in old cases is that it can bring fresh perspectives and evidence to cases that have already been closed. For instance, advancements in DNA analysis have allowed for the exoneration of individuals who were wrongly convicted. This can bring closure to families who have suffered for years without knowing the truth and restore public confidence in the justice system. Furthermore, new technology can also help to identify the real culprits, leading to a higher likelihood of justice being served.

Another advantage of using new science in old cases is that it can bring new light to old cases. The implementation of new technology in investigating old crimes can provide new information and evidence that was previously missed. This can help to provide answers for families and help to bring closure to long-standing cases. Moreover, it can help to bring new insights into the crime and the motive behind it, leading to a better understanding of the case.

In conclusion, I believe that the use of new science in old cases can bring a second chance for justice. It has the potential to uncover new evidence and information, bring closure to families, and help to restore public confidence in the justice system. The implementation of new science in old cases should be done in a responsible manner and with a thorough analysis of the evidence. This will ensure that justice is served and that the use of new science in old cases is done in a manner that is fair and impartial.

(320 words)

If you think the post is helpful, please follow and like us: