What would you do?

Question

If you were accused of a crime that you did not commit, but you did not have a good alibi.

The prosecutor offers you probation, and tells you that if you take it to trial and lose, you will go to prison for 10 years.

Would you plead guilty and take the probabtion to get out of jail, but have a felony on your record, or would you take it to trial to clear your name and risk going to prison if you lose?

I am asking this because it happened to someone I know. 10 years is a long time to risk, so he took the plea.

If you can't afford a lawyer and have a public defender.

Answer 1

@KrazyK8y: you must be joking... Even it was only 10 DAYs, there's more then enough reason to clear the name.

Try to clear your name. Let ALL your good friends come to the stand to talk about your (good) behaviour. Let known people who are active in science, talk about what's wrong with the evidence.
Let a known mathematician calculate in court how many people every year in the US could be accused falsely under the same circumstances. Isn't it so that, if there's doubt, you can't get convicted? Let the defender explain that to the jury more then once.
If some 'evidence' suddenly comes up in court without being informed in advance, tell the judge scientist need to be looking at the evidence.
If some scientific tests are negative to you, let another company do the test again. Many scientific tests go wrong. I just saw on Discovery Channel that some DNA found was tested to be from a man. In a retest however, it was tested to be from a woman.
Not having a alibi: if that had value being evidence, then everyone in the US could be proven to have comitted unnumeral crimes. Tell the jury that (by law!) someone is to be taken NOT guilty, UNLESS scientific evidence says otherwise.
Show evidence (there is) that people tend to follow a leader and their decisions, and that because of that: ask the judge to let the jury have an anonymous vote. If some jury member HAS doubt, the chance is MUCH bigger he says 'not guilty', because of the anonymity.

If the public defender doesn't want to go this way, see if it's possible to get another. If that's not possible, go to the newspapers (preferably the big ones) and tell them that the defender doesn't defend your case, and let them publish scientific research.

Joshuatrinchero also has a good point.

Answer 2

It is important to see what they have for evidence against the person, it will be the job of the prosecutor to present evidence to prove that your friend is the one who committed the crime; i.e. wittiness, physical evidence, motive or probable cause(depending on the type of case), etc. The prosecutor will always offer a "deal" to the defendant, especially if there is only one suspect, even if they have no evidence. If there is only one suspect and they have no real evidence, and you have no solid alibi, they will go "fishing" to see if you will bite. They want to see what you will do. 1st rule, you never take the first deal that they offer, that is just where they will start, if someone take the first deal that they are given, or any deal at all, that is pretty much an admission of guilt.

So, if I knew that I did not commit this crime, nor was any way linked to the crime, no way I would take the guilty plea. I would request a jury trial, and see where it went from there. By law the prosecutor MUST disclose ALL evidence before the trial to your lawyer.

Answer 3

Accusations alone will not support a conviction. And an alibi is not required to get an acquittal nor is it a guarantee of an acquittal.

Your facts are fuzzy or fishy, I'm not sure which.

Maybe your friend did the crime and is just maintaining his innocence to keep up a front or keep your respect.

No prosecutor can guarantee that you'll go to jail for 10 years. The sentence is up to the judge, sometimes and in some places with a recommendation from a jury. A first time offender won't get the max for anything short of 1st degree murder, so why would your friend think he'd pull a tenner? His PD would be able to tell him what's more realistic in his situation.

If the crime and your friend's record would justify a ten year sentence if convicted, a prosecutor with decent evidence to support a conviction wouldn't bargain away all jail time to get probation.

10 years probation is not a gift by any means. If you violate your probation terms, it can be revoked and you can be sentenced to up to the maximum allowed for the crime. Unless there was solid evidence against him, that's not much of a bargain.

What I suspect from your recitation of facts is that your friend was against the wall. There was strong case against him. He was looking at maybe a year in jail, maybe two. The prosecutor made a deal to keep him on leash for 10; your friend jumped at that because he's not up to vacationing with the bad boys.

Answer 4

I would like to think I would be prepared to clear my name.

However if the choice was probation or 10 years (which I am not sure is realistic) I would probably go for the probation - However I would discuss with my public defender and want to see what evidence the prosecution held first, because lack of an alibi is not sufficient on its own to convict me, the prosecution must have some other evidence. If I am innocent then there must be some flaw in that evidence.

Answer 5

Very tricky one.

Since I am sure that I did not commit the crime, even if I do not have a good alibi, I'd rather choose to take the trial than have a crime record. The judge and the jury will assess who is telling the truth, not the prosecutor.

A good lawyer to defend me will greatly help.

Answer 6

This is the part I find confusing. "If you were accused of a crime that you did not commit, but you did not have a good alibi." Did this person tell the truth? Are they covering for someone else? Did they in fact know who created the crime? I have a friend who did in fact take the blame for someone else because he felt it was a noble thing to do. Big mistake on his part. If you truly did not commit this crime then fight it all the way but don't cover for someone else because they will do the same thing again because they have evaded their responsibility.

Answer 7

I will never plead guilty because for me name is the most important treasure that a man could have. After all it's not my fault why should I do that.

Answer 8

I'd have to do that which would be best for my own conscious's sake and tell the truth despite the consequences.

Answer 9

I'd get OJ Simpson's Lawyer and fight it out. Heck - both ways it destroys your record, you might as well get acquitted clean!

Answer 10

I would never admit to a crime that I didn't commit.