Our government legal system was designed to be heard in front of a trial by journey which is taken away by plea bargaining. Prosecutors have a one sided relationship and pressure defendants into pleading guilty regardless. Often times, prosecutors meet in secret to dictate the negotiations. What this does is it takes the power of of judges hands and compromising the liberty of the American people. Over 20% of the 2 million in prison were wrongfully convicted as they were forced to plead guilty by their prosecutor. If the individual refuses to plead guilty the prosecutor charges him or her a more harsh punishment. For example, a drug addict who refused a 10 year jail plea went to court and was charged with life in prison without parole. The prosecutor was asked if he thought this action was just and he responded with, "no comment" Thus, plea bargaining out to be abolished.
Why should we get rid of plea bargains, One reason is that the people in question are let off from a big sentence for turning in their boss or co-stealer, meaning that they will be out and possibly be a stealing, killing, etc. This has to be stopped before it grows to a big problem.
The current practise of plea bargains is corrupt and demoralizes the values of people no matter what they contributed to the trial. The criminal demoralizes the justice system by (oftentimes) getting a reduced trial which works in favour of the criminal rather than the necessary justice required. This is against the morals society holds. What society does believe, however, is that a crime should be given the usual amount of time given rather than a shortened one because is what the criminal craves.
People who are innocent are encouraged not to excercise their rights to a trial by abandoning their right to be found innocent. Everyone knows juries can be unpredictable, would you put your ass on the line for 20 years instead of 5 even knowing you are innocent and shouldn't spend a day in prison? Doubtful.
People advocate for it because it encourages squealing on "partners". Unfortunately thei also encourages them to inflate what their "partners" did and lie about their involvement and actions.
Anyone who is innocent that is given a plea deal is encourage to imprison themselves, denying justice to an innocent person. Anyone who is guilty and given a plea deal is encouraged to lie, and being a criminal that is exactly what they will do.
The courts should be about determining who is guilty and who is innocent not who has the most balls and scaring everyone else out of their justice.
I think Plea bargaining should be abolished because it encourages crime and demoralizes both victims and society Abolishing it will restore respect for the criminal justice system, which now lets people think that they should get away with crime because they can. The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged that plea bargaining would not exist in the ideal world. Most criminal justice professionals accept it, however, believing that it is necessary in an overburdened criminal justice system. Nevertheless, it weakens deterrence and respect for the law and tends to extort guilty pleas, while working to the advantage of prosecutors, defendants, and defense lawyers who want to avoid trials. In addition, it is unnecessary, as shown by the experience of four jurisdictions. Alaska; Ventura County, Calif. Oakland County, Mich.; and New Orleans have found bans on plea bargaining to be effective. Thus, it should be abolished. Charges should not be reduced without specific findings and certifications on the record.
Yes,Should be plea bargaining be abolished.Because of the practical benefits of plea bargaining, it is doubtful it will be eliminated anytime soon. At this time, the consensus is that any injustice and unfairness that plea bargaining may introduce into the justice process is at least offset by benefits flowing to both the state and the defendant.
If you do the crime, you should be willing to do the time, regardless of what it may be. I don't think you should be able to bargain for less time than you deserve for what you did. It's too late for that at that point. You did what you did, and you gotta own up to it and pay the consequence for doing it. So yeah I think plea bargaining should be abolished.
People are less likely to kill people if they know that they are likely to get the death penalty or life in prison. However, if people know that they have a good chance at a plea bargain, that penalty seems farther away, making it less threatening and making them more likely to commit that crime. No matter what system of morals you're functioning under, justice (administered correctly) is best for everyone.
Though it could have negative effects for some Americans, much of the criminal justice system would be improved should plea bargaining be abolished. I say redo the entirety of the criminal justice system. It is structured in a way to provide upperclassmen with power over marginalized peoples. The issue isn't plea bargaining, it is the system as a whole.
Lessening a sentence time is wrong. It shows that the penal system is weak and ineffective. If a criminal admits guilt just to get out early, that is not really an admission of wrongdoing. The sentence should be completed. A faulty penal system means more crime. Criminals are let off way too easy.
The court is overloaded, if it's easier for us to use plea bargain to solve the case, why do we have to go a feather route and abolished plea bargain. We should leave the court for bigger and more important criminal cases. Also the fact that 90% of the united states criminal cases are using plea bargain, plea bargain should not be abolished. It is needed in the united states criminal justices system.
Some people are able to get out of jail before their sentences end because there is not enough room in the jail. With plea bargaining in place, there will be less people going into the jails, therefore there will be more room in jail and less major criminals will be getting out of jail or prison before their sentence ends.
Plea bargaining is something that will help and get you a smaller sentence. Let's say that you had accidentally hit a car and all it was was a paint scratch. You drove away because you didn't know. Should you really spend weeks or months in jail for that? I think that it wouldn't be fair to spend that much time in jail for a paint scratch.
It has been done in El Paso before and didn't work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Plea bargains are quick, thus, it saves time in the courts. It is useless to defend yourself if you know you are going to jail, so you might as well plea guilty. Courts have lots more cases these days, so plea bargains are needed. In the UK, 2.6 per cent of claims issued between 2002 and 2010 have gone to hearing or trial as of March 2013. There will be even less cases over with if we didn't have plea bargains.
Plea bargaining is generally only used when it isn't clear there will be a conviction. The suspect gets a reduced sentence and in exchange ensures there will be a conviction. Sometimes it also helps victims because information, such as the location of remains of murder victims, or kidnap victims, can be located.
Plea bargaining is an essential part of the judicial system. It enables the prompt and final closing of most cases while avoiding the large amounts of time that occur pretrial for those who are denied bail. And by shortening the time between charging and closing of the case, it enhances whatever may be the rehabilitative prospects of the guilty when they are ultimately imprisoned.
Although in the US, current practises of plea bargaining can be politically or financially motivated. But the thing is plea bargaining can be abused just like any other judicial practise. In order to improve plea bargaining, legislation must be implemented to improve its transparency.
No, plea bargaining should not be abolished. There have been many cases where a criminal has offered to turn in and/or testify against other guilty parties in return for a reduced sentence. Prosecutors do not have to accept the plea bargain, but for some cases, the deal could be well worth it by saving a lot of time, effort and money to get certain guilty parties behind bars quickly.
The idea behind a plea bargain is that a criminal saves the state the expense and trouble of a trial by simply admitting to the crime, and, in return, gets a lesser sentence. Without this, no criminal would have any incentive to do anything but drag out the process as long as possible, and the justice system would become even slower as a result.
Due process is not served by plea bargaining, However, The law is too complicated for a person to represent him/her self. I say that because court appointed attorneys often lack the motivation to spend sufficient time and resources on a case that, In real life actually cost them a good deal of money to do the best job they can. It is relatively easy for a prosecutor to intimidate a suspect due to the fact the defendant is indigent. Judges have full caseloads and want to get rid of their stack of dockets, And the prosecutor wants to make the judge happy (the job may be his or hers one day) A jury may, Or may not find you guilty, Regardless of the truth. There is little public interest in justice, Unless it is personal. There are many not guilty or guilty of a lesser charge, And many that are guilty and walk the streets freely due to financial limitations or just plain luck. Money rules, Always will. . . This is America and that's not a slam, Just the honest truth.