Plea bargaining Name Institutional affiliation Trial by a jury was intended as a truth seeking mechanism, a means of achieving fairness and a way to hold the government to the principles of the constitution. The Sixth Amendment of the constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury. It gives the defendant a right to challenge evidence presented by the government and provides for a conviction only if an impartial jury finds the defendant guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Despite the right to a fair trial, the criminal justice system is largely a system of plea-bargaining with the outcome being decided by the prosecutor (Bibas, 2004).
In conclusion in my opinion plea bargaining could be perfect for some people that have not committed a crime but the evidence against them is too much, and they know that there is a greater possibility that they will be convicted of the offense. In some cases, people get off easy and do not have to suffer like that
A plea bargain is an agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant in a criminal case. The prosecutor gives the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to the original charge with less than the maximum sentence. For example, the prosecution and the defense may agree to a misdemeanor charge instead of a felony charge or the parties may agree to a sentence of 12 years instead of 20 years if the recommended sentence for that crime is 10-20 years imprisonment.
Plea bargains are negotiations between the prosecutor and the criminal defendant. In this negotiation, the criminal defendant consents to pleading guilty. When the criminal defendant takes the guilty plea, he or she is able receive reductions in their charges or sentences. There are pros and cons of plea bargains, but these bargains can be doing more harm than good. Plea bargaining is a simple process but can have long term repercussions.
I do not think that the plea bargain lets someone off easy. While they might receive a lesser change they also are having the fact that they admitted to doing something taken into consideration by the court system when they decide on the punishment. I feel that it equals out in the long run for those who end up taking the plea bargain. In small cases yes the person might get off with just probation, but is probation was something in condensation then the crime could not have been that detrimental. They would not offer something like probation to a deranged murderer if they confessed to killing someone.
When the jury trial process is replaced with plea negotiations, we lose trust and reliability in the system. When we give efficiency that the plea bargain has provided power, it comes at a substantial cost. People who are indeed innocent of the crimes they were convicted have now been influenced into pleading guilty for the sake of efficiency. Not to mention the collateral consequences that accompany a person when they plead out. It also undermines the reliability of convictions in general (Gilchrist, 2011).
In cases where the victim is unwilling to testify or press charges the prosecutor
Plea bargaining is an unethical practice because it can force innocent men to plead guilty, defense lawyers often can't see the evidence in time to advise their client, and it lets criminals get away with a lighter sentence than they should. The innocent pleading guilty The concept of an innocent man pleading guilty was far fetched in 19941. Which is truly surprising.
It is a very important responsibility that everyone should take seriously because the fate of another person is on his or her shoulders. Juries are there to decide “guilty” or “not guilty” based on the facts and evidence presented. This paper will
The United States criminal justice system is riddled with cases of many varieties. Some have obvious outcomes while others warrant more detailed analysis. However, some cases go beyond the court into other courts, where they are decided, such as Jackson versus Hobbs in 2012. The courts try to lighten the load of cases they have by offering plea bargaining, an agreement among a defendant and a prosecutor in which the defendant pleads guilty to a charge that is less severe than what he or she is initially charged for in the hopes that clemency will be administered. Sometimes, however, people accused of a crime are completely innocent, and it is not until technology is released, such as DNA testing, decades later that these people are proved to
The counselor also judged that he should rely on the plea colloquy for evidence about respondent’s background and his claim of emotional stress. The counselor believed the plea colloquy provided sufficient information to the Court about these subjects. He also believed that by not introducing new evidence on these subjects, he prevented the State from cross-examining the respondent on his claim and from introducing its own psychiatric evidence. He also was successful in excluding other damaging evidence from the sentencing hearing, including the introduction of the respondent’s criminal history. He also judged that a pre-sentence report would likely be more damaging than helpful because it
Since the courts are backlogged and many public defenders and judges being overworked, this causes plea bargaining to be used repeatedly. According to Walker et al. (2018), plea bargaining leaves many people no option but to plea guilty even when this is not their best option. This is due to a multitude of reasons but mainly to receive a lesser charge. For example, a felony and little time in jail may be better than risking multiple felonies and an excessive amount of time in jail.