Plea Bargaining
AllStarZ
11 Mar 2009
For those in countries where it does not exist, a plea bargain is an agreement established between both the defence and prosecution for the defendant in a case to plead guilty to a charge in return for more lenient sentencing.
This has its advantages and disadvantages.
Fact is, the whole process is expensive and time consuming. It can take nearly a year simply to get to preliminary trials. There are only so many facilities and people available to take care of these matters, and so much time and money is spent behind the preparation. The justice system can waste millions of dollars a year trying to prove that so and so is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt to the jury, who could take even more time in delivering their verdict, while more and more trials are put into queue. Or even if the defendant is to all purposes completely guilty, it would still take months to go through the process, and even then they might be found innocent for one reason or another. Plea bargaining saves enormous amounts of time, money, and effort for everyone, especially if the person at hand to all observers is clearly guilty.
On the other hand, plea bargaining raises the question of whether justice has actually been served. Those who are clearly guilty of a crime receive punishment disproportionate to the offence committed, and the punishment neither serves to act as a sufficient means of rehabilitating or deterring further crime. Then there's the case of the innocent pleading guilty in exchange for more lenient sentencing, because it is more desirable than going through the process of trial and possibly receiving a full conviction for a crime that they never committed. Plea bargaining allows criminals to receive modest and disproportionate punishment for their crimes while those who are innocent of a particular crime may choose to be convicted simply because the stress and potential conviction under harsher sentencing make it seem a desirable alternative.
So then, where does everyone stand on this?
This has its advantages and disadvantages.
Fact is, the whole process is expensive and time consuming. It can take nearly a year simply to get to preliminary trials. There are only so many facilities and people available to take care of these matters, and so much time and money is spent behind the preparation. The justice system can waste millions of dollars a year trying to prove that so and so is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt to the jury, who could take even more time in delivering their verdict, while more and more trials are put into queue. Or even if the defendant is to all purposes completely guilty, it would still take months to go through the process, and even then they might be found innocent for one reason or another. Plea bargaining saves enormous amounts of time, money, and effort for everyone, especially if the person at hand to all observers is clearly guilty.
On the other hand, plea bargaining raises the question of whether justice has actually been served. Those who are clearly guilty of a crime receive punishment disproportionate to the offence committed, and the punishment neither serves to act as a sufficient means of rehabilitating or deterring further crime. Then there's the case of the innocent pleading guilty in exchange for more lenient sentencing, because it is more desirable than going through the process of trial and possibly receiving a full conviction for a crime that they never committed. Plea bargaining allows criminals to receive modest and disproportionate punishment for their crimes while those who are innocent of a particular crime may choose to be convicted simply because the stress and potential conviction under harsher sentencing make it seem a desirable alternative.
So then, where does everyone stand on this?
Major Fuckup
12 Mar 2009
i reckon plea bargaining is good for small offender's "traffic, public disturbance ect" but not right for big time offender's like murder or where people get seriously hurt and expensive shit get broken
Wizard
12 Mar 2009
Unless it's part of a conspiracy/organisation [rico] there is little room for plea bargining in a murder case.
There is certainly room for it the justice system in certain circumstances. It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or coporate fraud, where trials can actually last years. But can't be accepted in blanket situations.
There is certainly room for it the justice system in certain circumstances. It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or coporate fraud, where trials can actually last years. But can't be accepted in blanket situations.
AllStarZ
13 Mar 2009
Wizard, on 12 Mar 2009, 12:46, said:
"...there is little room for plea bargining in a murder case..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
Which brings me to ultimately, a more puzzling question: which is more serious, scamming people or murdering people?
WNxMastrefubu
13 Mar 2009
AllStarZ, on 12 Mar 2009, 20:26, said:
Wizard, on 12 Mar 2009, 12:46, said:
"...there is little room for plea bargining in a murder case..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
Which brings me to ultimately, a more puzzling question: which is more serious, scamming people or murdering people?
IMO depends on situation. 1 person murdered < Berny Madoff and his actions but thats an extreme situation. in most situations i'd be with murder as worse
edit: dang, 500th post already
Edited by Dijiman, 13 March 2009 - 00:40.
AllStarZ
13 Mar 2009
Dijiman, on 12 Mar 2009, 20:30, said:
AllStarZ, on 12 Mar 2009, 20:26, said:
Wizard, on 12 Mar 2009, 12:46, said:
"...there is little room for plea bargining in a murder case..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
Which brings me to ultimately, a more puzzling question: which is more serious, scamming people or murdering people?
IMO depends on situation. 1 person murdered < Berny Madoff and his actions but thats an extreme situation. in most situations i'd be with murder as worse
edit: dang, 500th post already
How about twenty children murdered to thousands of families losing their jobs, their money, and their hopes?
Major Fuckup
13 Mar 2009
AllStarZ, on 13 Mar 2009, 14:51, said:
Dijiman, on 12 Mar 2009, 20:30, said:
AllStarZ, on 12 Mar 2009, 20:26, said:
Wizard, on 12 Mar 2009, 12:46, said:
"...there is little room for plea bargining in a murder case..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
"...It costs less than a full trial in the case of something like embezzlement or corporate fraud, where trials can actually last years..."
Which brings me to ultimately, a more puzzling question: which is more serious, scamming people or murdering people?
IMO depends on situation. 1 person murdered < Berny Madoff and his actions but thats an extreme situation. in most situations i'd be with murder as worse
edit: dang, 500th post already
How about twenty children murdered to thousands of families losing their jobs, their money, and their hopes?
well that is a tough one
AllStarZ
13 Mar 2009
But I digress.
In so far the justice system is concerned with plea bargaining, my point is that you cannot compromise for one case against another.
In so far the justice system is concerned with plea bargaining, my point is that you cannot compromise for one case against another.
