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

How did this tradition of going easier on folks who plead guilty to criminal acts begin? Please include sources preferably from legal web sites.

2007-08-20 08:12:13 · 26 answers · asked by Ask Mike 4 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

26 answers

If they are pleading guilty they are admitting that they know they did wrong, if it has to go to trial then they are usually trying to blame someone else or think they can beat it and get away with it. A lot of times they have also agreed to a plea bargain in return for the guilty plea.

2007-08-20 08:20:13 · answer #1 · answered by Lori B 6 · 1 0

1

2016-06-10 23:26:30 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

The court system has become so bogged down with inconsequential trials over these last twenty years and it costs the taxpayers and the state an enormous amount of money whenever a person pleads not guilty and wants a court trial. Any person going before the Judge can usually expect a lighter sentence just to lighten up their calendars. In my personal opinion every citizen should spend at least one day of their time in a courtroom just to get a realistic idea of what types of cases go through the system and how hard the Judges and their staff work.

2007-08-20 11:40:26 · answer #3 · answered by DONNA L B 2 · 2 0

Just pleading guilty actually gets you worse sentences. Pleading guilty in a plea agreement is what gets you lighter sentences. The idea is, that you know you would be found guilty of multiple crimes. So in order to reduce the costs of the trial(s), the prosecution allows you to plead guilty to one or some of the crimes and doesn't pursue other charges. The prosecution usually tries to make a deal that still punishes the criminal the appropriate amount, without a long trail process that wasts money.

2007-08-20 08:21:55 · answer #4 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 4 0

The theory of punishment stems out of a sense of social Justice.
The cases are made out as "Individual/s Versus People of State".
A person who pleads guilty, is considered unlikely to repeat the crime, since the society regards the deeper levels of acceptance as being evolved into a better human being.
So Jurisprudence, acceptable world over, especially in democratic societies have a tradition to lighten the sentences when a person pleads guilty.
The process of Justice is more inclined to protect the society from persons committing acts of crime, towards ensuring orderliness, social security, etc, in the society rather than striving to uplift the moral standards (for which an entirely different institution is set up).

2007-08-20 14:15:44 · answer #5 · answered by Spiritualseeker 7 · 2 0

Because they take up less of the court's time if they plead. If they want trials, the court will get mad and slap it to them for taking up so much time and resources.
I know someone who really didn't want to plead to a dui, but if he went to trial and lost, he could have gotten 6 mos. jail. If he plead, he got basically nothing more than fines and classes. This may very well be an unwritten practice. There are sentencing guidelines, which means the judge gets to pick 0-6 mos. jailtime, and unfortunately where it falls can just depend on the judge's mood that day. Ridiculous but true.

2007-08-20 08:21:50 · answer #6 · answered by Flatpaw 7 · 2 0

i've got had some criminal matters in my time. the secret's that in case you haven't any longer have been given a solid lawyer, you're extra suitable off with a plea good purchase. This lawyer does not have any reason to artwork complicated for you. He won't characterize you as solid as an lawyer which you pay for out of pocket. i'm not sure what you meant approximately deportation, yet that should sway my decision. If there's a threat of being deported till you're discovered harmless, then via all potential, roll the cube and plead harmless. another ingredient you should evaluate. tell the decide which you're no longer happy with your consel, and that he's pressuring you into pleading harmless. This lawyer will possibly no longer have lots experiance at jury trials. discover out if he's qualified to combat on your innocence.

2016-10-08 22:02:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I searched and searched for things like 'why plead guilty,' and by luck searched 'plea bargain.' That is what "pleading guilty for the lighter sentence" is.

I supposed beforehand that--as our prison system is sometimes-meant to "rehabilitate citizens" (either that, or "eradicate the criminals")--a guilty-plea is a sign that the sinning party is partially repentent, and that the prison involved can skip 'making him feel sorry' and get straight to the 'welcomed punishment.' mwa-ha-ha-ha-harr

My source also said, "In other cases, a defendant may be culpable in one criminal matter, but have information that would help in prosecuting a broader or more significant matter. In such a case, prosecutors may agree to reduced charges or sentencing in the first matter, in exchange for the defendant's cooperation (e.g. testimony) in prosecuting the larger matter."

2007-08-22 10:25:28 · answer #8 · answered by Uncle MythMan 3 · 2 0

Plea bargins let prosecutors impose sentence without a trial, thus saving enormous resources. The Wikipedai says " it can be argued that the American criminal justice system would simply cease to function without plea bargaining, and that it forms a framework wherein the accused and his accusers can reach an agreement which settles the case once and for all, in what is hoped will be a spirit of fairness.

Another reason plea bargains are favored is that it allows criminals who accept responsibility for their actions to receive consideration for their remorse and for not causing limited resources to be expended in further investigating and litigating their case.

In other cases, a defendant may be culpable in one criminal matter, but have information that would help in prosecuting a broader or more significant matter. In such a case, prosecutors may agree to reduced charges or sentencing in the first matter, in exchange for the defendant's cooperation (e.g. testimony) in prosecuting the larger matter.

In still other cases, prosecutors may be certain of the guilt of the defendant in a matter, but the admissible or available evidence might not be enough to convince a jury of the defendant's guilt. This could be the result of a witness or victim dying prior to trial or certain evidence being lost or ruled inadmissible. In those situations it can be of benefit to both the prosecutor and the defendant to arrange a plea bargain; the prosecutor avoids the chance that the defendant could be found not guilty and the defendant avoids the chance that he or she could be found guilty of more serious charges or given a heavier punishment.

Plea bargaining also allows prosecutors to settle cases without forcing a victim to endure a lengthy court process or have to testify in a jury trial. This can be particularly important in cases involving fragile witnesses or victims (young children in sexual abuse cases, elderly people who have been victimized by relatives, seriously ill people and others)."

2007-08-20 08:43:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

The rationale is that those who plead guilty are showing remorse for the crime they have done to society. They also may have important nformation that can help convict others involved in the same or related crimes by testifying against them. These people realize that they have the opportunity to reduce their time in prision or receive a lighter form of punishment so they accept plea deals. They are not SNITCHES when they realize that those who comit the crimes must do the time!

2007-08-21 06:58:17 · answer #10 · answered by GMK 2 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers