Marcus J. Paulus 2/14/2018 Plea Paper Plea Paper The plea bargain is necessary part of our justice system. This is because of the vast number of cases our justice system has to deal with each year it would be almost impossible to take all these cases to court each year. Plea bargains give people the chance to reduced there sentence by admitting they committed the crime or a less crime in order for the prosecutor to get a guilty verdict. The plea bargain process is supposed to be introduced to the discussion but they prosecutor and not the defendant.
But also it helps ensure that the rights of the parties are protected. Con: it can take a long time to work your way through. When you hear pros and cons of due process, they are not talking about food or stem cell research. What is being referred to is the legal system, as cold as it may seem. To be bluntly honest, there are no cons when it comes to the legal system, but the main pro is justice and fairness.
Adversary system is the government and the defendant, the government must prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt before the defendant can be convicted. The defense must present evidence before a jury and the jury decides on the case if either the defendant is guity or non guilty of the charge, this is known as a verdict. The idea of the court system is to show the truth to emerge either by the defendant or the prosecution. Each side of the trial the defendant and the prosecution have full opportunity to present their ideas and a truth would emerge between the two. In some cases, if it is acceptable with both parties, the judge can decide a case without a
Another strength is in the decision wasn’t determined by one person in the 12 person jury everyone had different opinions and reasons why they believe the accused was innocent or guilty. It shows that if one person made the decision there is no one to challenge your perspective like what was done with the jury. Several weaknesses that were seen with jury service was when the barrister from either side were talking they were very focused on winning the case not on explaining what was happening. From the start it was hard to gather what evidence ect that both sides were presenting it wasn’t explained well and was difficult to understand. Another weakness that
But recently gerrymandering has become more controversial because people feel that it has taken away their rights as a voter and it swings the votes to one side by a big percentage. Current cases are before the courts to decide if gerrymandering is legal. Some states have been discussing whether it should still be allowed during elections. “Many efforts are underway to remedy this political
Since his confession could not be used, Miranda was not convicted. These, although very different, cases both support that due process holds the upmost importance in
Sentencing can mean a variety of things such as, fines, probation, time in a rehabilitative service, etc. When a judge sentences the defendant, he bases it off the severity of the crime. The Sentencing Process and Determination There are different options in the sentencing process.
Although the rationale of peremptory challenges, ironically, would be for the defendant and the prosecution to get rid of any potentially biased jurors, lawyers may instead use their peremptory challenges to form a jury that would pass a more favourable verdict. As lawyers are also not required to explain their decisions in striking out jurors in most cases, the makeup of the jury can thus be heavily imbalanced. However, as a judge would be required to not let any preconceived bias affect the administering of justice, the accused would hence receive a fairer treatment as compared to juries that might have any bias towards either the prosecution or the defendant. With juries also not being required to explain their decisions, any bias that the jury might have would not be easily found and challenged. Especially in cases where the death penalty is concerned, it is all the more important that juries mete out a fair verdict.
The problems that arise out of false confessions usually do not become an issue until the confession is entered into evidence at trial, with the exception of plea bargains. But it is reflected in the substantial case law surrounding false confessions that little can be done during trial, outside of suppression, without prior checks. The question remains how a confession becomes
The concept of jury nullification is not one that is broadly known or spoken about in the discipline of law. This is because until more recent years the concept was considered a complex subject that garnered plenty of conversation and debate. To understand the controversy that surrounds this particular area of the law, a definition of jury nullification is in order. It is known that the jury’s role is to act as the unbiased and impartial voice of judgment during the proceedings of a court case.
There are many issues associated with plea bargaining. The accused could benefit with the possibility of a reduced or combined charges, reduced attorney fees, and the chance of a reduced or shorter sentence that may be imposed by going to trial. Plea bargaining can also give the prosecutors the ability to convict the accused even if they have a weak case and there is question whether or not they can get a conviction. It also will save time and resources necessary for trial. This will apply to defense attorneys as well, they may be unsure of their ability to get an acquittal for their client; however, in some cases the accused many know in his heart that he is innocent and want to go to trial.
- PRO: Those in favor of abolishing peremptory challenges argue that this current process is lengthy, costly, and ineffective. The author supports this stance with high-profile case trials of previous times. In a case such as the OJ Simpson’s trial, the author reveals that there were 300 citizens selected to be potential jurors and only a few were actually chosen. Additionally, prosecutors and defense attorneys took three months to eliminate candidates and did so with the aid of jury consultants. Consequently, peremptory challenges are believed to slow down court proceedings and making it more costly for the time that is said to be wasted.
These proposals do not exist in the world since there is a well-established principle in society saying that everyone is accountable for their actions, so Charles I cannot be an exception. After thorough questioning of the defendant, taking into account his responses proves that Charles I is without questionable doubt guilty of the accused crimes. Please set aside the arguments raised by the defense today, which are inferior to those of the prosecution. At the conclusion of the case, we ask that the just ladies and gentlemen of the jury produce a verdict of guilty for the people of the United Kingdom. Thank
" Four of its main points include: “No taxes could be levied without Parliament 's consent. No English subject could be imprisoned without cause--thus reinforcing the right of habeas corpus. No quartering of soldiers in citizens’ homes. No martial law may be used in peacetime.” This is similar to the English Bill of Rights (1688), which guaranteed free elections and rights for citizens accused of crime.
The main reason players should not be allowed to unionize is players could get whatever they want if they went on strike. A nationwide strike of NCAA athletes would not only upset the school, but also the millions of people who watch college sports every year. Besides making masses of people upset a strike would lose millions of dollars of revenue for schools, affecting the whole school not just the athletes. “This threat has to do with the position of these so-called "premier" sports as part of a continuing and dramatic revolution in the culture of sport in America(Hearn)”. The premier sports in America include basketball, football, and baseball.