This is a great question with various for and against points so i shall just give you a few that come to mind.
FOR
-conditions can be below to basic living standards, which is immoral and a violation of human rights
-People wouldn't voluntarily pay money to maintain the living conditions of convicts due to the atrocities of their crime.
-Statistics support the fact 'it doesn't work' as rehabilitation is in the minority
-it does not reduce crime rate in the slightest
-corruption
AGAINST
-what is the question suggesting should happen to convicts instead?
-wrongfully convicted
apologies im running out of time, so i can write appropriate against. hope this helps though
Answer:
b. one that might have affected the outcome of a case.
Explanation:
A reversible error is an error of sufficient gravity to warrant reversal of a judgment on appeal. It is an error by the trier of law (judge), or the trier of fact (the jury, or the judge if it is a bench trial), or malfeasance by one of the trying attorneys, which results in an unfair trial. It is to be distinguished from harmless errors which do not rise to a level which brings the validity of the judgment into question and thus do not lead to a reversal upon appeal.
Answer: Maconochoes system of moral reform
Explanation: