This way the defendant and their attorney would be able to see if they actually have enough evidence to win the case in court. This would element most of the innocent people pleading guilty out of fear of long prison sentences like what Mr. Gampero did. The second thing I would change is that if the Judges or prosecutors make treats to put someone in prison for a long period of time if they do not take the plea then the case must be thrown out of be tried by a different jurisdiction. Like what happened with the OC snitch
A person who is in pre-trial detention is and should be considered innocent until proven guilty. Some people who are in low-income families do not have the proper lawyer to guide them and will not be given a fair trial, which would congest prisons even more. Finally, with the prisons being so congested, we have to pay taxes for every inmate. The average American tax payer will spend around $20,000 to $30,000 dollars a year, that is equivalent or more than some people 's yearly income. What are we going to do about this?
Many people have their own opinion about sentencing reform. Some people think that it should be change while others think that it should stay how it is. In my opinion i think that they should not change it. To start with, i think that the sentencing reform should stay the same because there 's too many crimes going on in this world. According to source 1 it states, “there is no question that crime rates will increase if sentencing reform provides large numbers of criminals with early release from prison and requires shorter sentences when they re-offend.” This is explaining how if the sentencing reforms are changed there will be more crimes and many criminals.
There are a number of reasons that someone may need the help of a criminal defense lawyer. A good one is not cheap, but a conviction on your record can cost you over and over for the rest of your life. First of all are the very real possibilities of large fines and time behind bars. However, even misdemeanor convictions can keep you from getting a good job. Although many potential employers will tell you that they will only check back through 7 years of your criminal history, that is largely a myth.
With this solution, the convict will not be integrated back into the society, thus decreasing the number of reoffending convicts. But even with this solution, there will be a number of murderers that will arise from our society. One way to solve this may be to do further research and analysis in order to try to prevent more people from killing innocent victims in our society. Furthermore, the question of whether to reinstate the death penalty in Canada is very difficult to answer. But through further analysis, saying no to the death penalty is overall the better decision.
Apart from the fact that cathartic retribution is dubious justification for punishment, there seems little reason to believe that it is necessary to favor present modes of execution over the paradigm in order to prevent people from taking the law into their own hands. It can just as easily be argued that executions through cruel methods encourage public brutality and disrespect for the law. In the past, lynchings seemed to occur more often in states that employed the traditional modes of execution than in jurisdictions that had abolished capital punishment. Because a significant proportion of the public favors abolition of capital punishment, any execution could inspire public resentment of the legal system, particularly if the capital punishment were performed in an unnecessarily cruel
This can cause mental suffering, as it could with anyone who is awaiting the day of their death. Many of those who are against capital punishment consider this cruel and unusual punishment. When you execute someone, that person can not be rehabilitated. Because sentencing someone to death can weigh heavily on someone, those members of the jury may let someone walk free, rather than sentence them. Innocent people can be wrongfully convicted and
It is much harder to obtain drugs and alcohol in prison then in society. Thus an assumption can be made that incarceration by itself is a rehabilitative method. While this is true in many ways, going cold turkey off of drugs does nothing to treat their minds, and habits when free. By having these programs available to all prisoners it will allow them to work out their problems
Recidivism rates are another reason some support the death penalty. There are many offenders that are inclined to perpetrate the same crimes over and over again when they are freed from prison. Criminals who have perpetrate an exceptionally atrocious offence may have the death penalty leveled on them as a way of making sure that they never repeat the crime ever again. This happens to be brought up on a regular basis with repeat offenders like serial killers. Some say that the price of executing a prisoner cost less than housing them for life in prison when in actuality the cost of a capital trial, housing on death row, and all of the other aspects related to a capital case end up costing more than a non-death penalty case.
I feel that the amount of money used for the death penalty could be used for better things. I also feel that it isn’t right to kill people for certain things, especially when it isn’t always 100% proven. Another reason why I don’t think it’ right is because the death penalty can prolong suffering for victims’ families (The United States should abolish Capital Punishment, 2012). The death penalty is way more expensive than life in prison because the constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. They do this to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they didn’t do.