most of my intro would be acknowledging the role of diff stakeholders and focusing on themes of balancing the rights of victims, offenders and society.
eg. you can look at strip searching cases (especially minors getting searched without parental consent at concerts) and how they seem (to society and the alledged offender) to be punishing the offender by putting them through a traumatic experience of intimate searching in a public and crowded area. so in this manner, the community (especially families and parents) seem to view this as a punishment to the alledged offender rather than the prevention of crime since (im pretty sure due to SMH data from 2022) only 2% of strip search cases successfully find drugs on the alledged person. in this manner, they are now the victim. in addition, u can talk about legal experts recommending to police (talk about lepra and role of discretion in - more often than not - misjudging the situation) to employ more technologically advantageous methods of detecting drugs (eg screening, etc u can research this)
so ur holistic argument thru out ur essay is that stakeholders regard the punishment of offenders as a "jerk response" from law enforcement authorities and the courts rather than a proactive engagement with community interests to prevent future crime.
also charge negotiation is a rlly good point to bring up here bc u can talk about how altho the courts aim to expedite the trial process, this often results in alledged offenders pleading guilty simply to evade the financial burden of attending court. in this way it seems as though the courts (nice to talk abt judicial arms and difference between significance of law enforcement agencies and enforcement of court decisions) only care about sentencing the offender rather than administering a fair and just legal process as per (whatever human right this is).
