English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

Ahh, good question..

Ok.. basically people do this because the state can tack on any amount of charges they want and they have federal minimums. (This is how people go to jail for 50 years for selling pot.. yes, it is happening to people that fight the charge.)

You can ether spend all your money fighting the government (who is never wrong) or you can just accept a guilty plea for something minimal.

This is kinda criminal because due to the bureaucracy it denies people a jury trial. Who would fight a difficult case for a 50 year sentence when they could try for 5.. even if they were not guilty?

2007-04-29 15:35:09 · answer #1 · answered by k X 2 · 1 2

If it were not for plea-bargaining, the weight of the criminal justice system would cause it to implode. For this reason, it is a very effective tool in reducing the needless use of very limited resources and court time. The disadvantage is that it can result in injustice and wrongful convictions. Far too many times, lawyers are faced with clients who admit guilt on a plea bargain just to get rid of the charges or because they cannot post bail/bond. Yes this happens in particular as a person’s criminal record increases resulting, in practical terms(not legal), in a diminishing of the presumption of innocence for that person every time a new charge is laid—innocent of that charge or not because it happens that in many cases the jury will convict even if the glove does not fit. In particular, those who cannot afford to hire lawyers privately are most at risk. This is not to say that publicly funded defense lawyers are no good. It means that they do not have luxury of marshalling the case for the defense to the same extent and strength that is available to the prosecution for the state. The prosecution of criminal cases is overwhelmingly better funded than the defense. Some times, the prosecution will bargain something it should not bargain but because there were problems in the investigation or in the available evidence. These cases often result in public outcry because the public does not understand that if it were not for the plea bargain, the state risks getting nothing at all after trial. Defense lawyers bargain out the latter cases regardless of a week case for the state because on the instructions of their clients they wish to eliminate to risk of getting worse at trial.

2007-04-29 22:58:08 · answer #2 · answered by Guit Man 2 · 1 0

If you are a criminal and guilty you plea out and get off If you are innocent and fight it you go to jail longer than if you are guilty.

It is not about truth any more, any allegation is up to you to prove yourself innocent. Every arrest they give you another felony for attacking the cop and it is only his word against yours.... guess who they believe.

And then when you get to court, it is not about proof , it is about emotion, and how terrible they can make it sound.
Everyone is guilty till proven innocent otherwise they would never have been arrested. If they were judged innocent that would be an insult to the cop and we can't have that either.

The guilty know the game and are usually able to not be arrested much less investigated. I have known many who were guilty never get arrested and many who were innocent, never get an honest trial.

It is more about not paying taxes for justice, than it is about honest government.

The cops don't want to do any actual work at their job, but have hair trigger egos.

The Judges want hours, bankers would be embarrassed about.

The Lawyers want the kind of money only actual crooks can afford.

The politicians want to squeeze the public defenders office because all they do is defend crooks.

Any that don't fit that mold are under severe pressure to change or leave.

Innocence is no defense

2007-04-29 23:40:02 · answer #3 · answered by Dragon 4 · 1 0

Advantage: if you are a criminal and want time taken off your sentence.
Disadvantage: If you are a defendant and you have a criminal who is willing to lie to get time taken off his sentence.
Advantage: If the prosecutor can put a serious offender in jail and by letting a lessor offences slide a little.
Aavantage: The victim of the crime doesn't get true justice accept in the case of the President or his administration. He has committed a crime against all Americans so no one would be cheated out of justice of the prosecutor gave immunity or lessen the sentence if he witnessed against the president

2007-04-29 22:43:45 · answer #4 · answered by Hanlex 2 · 1 0

Plea bargaining is good because the issues are limited and the witnesses are already identified. However, plea bargaining is binding on all parties and if there are concessions that should be made, these are already barred.

2007-04-29 22:42:19 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0 1

Adv. Shortening of sentence or consequences
Dis. You could be cleared of all charges

2007-04-29 22:33:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers