In the United States, Plea Bargaining Unermines the criminal justice system
Debate Rounds (3)
Justice from webster:
the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
My two contentons are...
1. PB decreases some of the checks in our legal system
2.PB is inconsistant
PB DECREASES SOME OF THE CHECKS IN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM
A major concern within a Plea agreement is the withdraw of a jury. No jury equals to much power given to the prosecutor. No jury means that a prosecutor has open reign on evidence, charges, etc.
PB IS INCONSISTANT
Another problem within Plea Bargaining is the absence of consistancy. DEpending on where the defendant was found, they can receive vastly different sentences due to plea bargaining.
I accept Pro's definition of Plea Bargaining, but I will be refuting both of Pro's contentions about how it is that PB undermines the criminal justice system, and if acceptable to Pro, I will argue that PB actually enhances the "justice" in our criminal justice system by allowing the prosecutor the discretion to treat each case individually.
This is my first debate and I thank you for the opportunity.
With Plea Bargains main token for defendants being a lighter sentence, i can see no support behind this (so far) i am invite my opponent to elaborate.
I will now continue to build up my own case:
It is common sense that in a trial, the defendant has the opportunity to prove him/herself innocent. Regardless of whether they are guilty or not, the opportunity for a defendant to testify is never a bad thing.
As my opponent has stated, Plea bargaining allows the prosecutors to treat each case individually. Sure, but doesn't the Criminal justice system as a whole already? the problem that is unique to plea bargaining is WHEN the prosecutors treat the case individually. Prosecutors, gauged by the amount of cases concluded, have intent to resolve cases quickly
PB offer incentive for the prosecutor to resolve PB inconsistently.
I thank my opponent again and wish the best of luck, thx
Pro's 2nd contention that Plea Bargaining increases the inconsistency of our justice system because it pushes prosecutors to resolve cases quickly is also almost always wrong. Prosecutors already have an enormous workload, so does the court. If PB were eliminated, that workload would increase drastically, thereby over-stressing an already over-worked system, that would lead to less vigorous prosecution of the guilty less protection of the rights of the innocent.
My counter contention is that Plea Bargaining actually increases justice in our justice system. What Plea Bargaining does is separate the wheat from the chaff. There are countless crimes of varying degree committed every single day in every single jurisdiction. It would take an army of litigators and court personnel to give a full blown jury trial in every case. Since we are not a society of unlimited resources, choices have to be made, priorities set.
Every defendant that admits guilt in a plea bargain deal is one less case that has to go to trial, one less trial to pay for, that leaves more time, energy and resources to fully adjudicate the tougher cases, and the more important cases. Great harm is done to every innocent defendant awaiting trial when their case is delayed because some guilty person refused to admit their guilt and insisted on a full trial. Longer delays not only lead to increased suffering and loss to the guilty awaiting trial, but they reduce the quality of the trial and the verdict because evidence, especially eye-witness testimony degrades over time.
Justice is never harmed by the guilty admitting their crime and accepting punishment.
tmoney226 forfeited this round.
cameronalbrecht forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.