Introduction
As the world develops and the gap between the haves and the have-nots increases, the likelihood of the disadvantaged in the society of committing crime is very high. To ensure that everybody lives comfortably, when an individual commits a crime there are no other options left apart from arresting the suspect and presenting him before a court of law to answer the charges. The court may find the suspect guilty or innocent of the offence accused of depending on the evidence provided before it.
The process of deciding whether you are guilty or innocent can be reached through two approaches: either through undergoing the full trial process or admitting to guilt through a plea bargaining process. If a suspect is sure that the provided evidence will end up with conviction, a trial process through plea bargaining is more preferable as most of the times the courts are lenient on the penalties imposed and if one had committed several crimes he is charged for some while in others he is set free. Plea bargaining approach serves as a time solving strategy both for the convict and the court. It is worth noting that in the recent past most of the court sentences in the United States of America have been through plea bargains. Most legal experts have attributed this to the reality that a complete crime trial involves many legal procedures, which need to be followed and thus wastage of time of all the parties involved (Weninger, 1987).
While some people may compare plea bargaining to an out of court settlement as in the civil process it should be noted that what happens here is only leniency otherwise acquittal is a hard thing to expect (Hall, Dolatowski, & Schmalleger, 2010).
An important fact to note is that bargained pleas are not done depending on the nature of the crime one committed rather on the sentence one is likely to be convicted if he pleads guilty to the crime without wasting the courts time and money with the investigation process. Other suspects may prefer plea bargaining when the magnitude of the crime they committed need to be lessened for a lighter sentence to follow, for example, if one kills another person the court may decide that he pleads guilty and be charged for manslaughter rather than taking a risk and undergo the whole trial process where if found guilty one will be convicted for murder and thus a longer sentence that may sometimes be a life sentence or death through the electric chamber.
It is a major concern in what would happen if following the game theory, all convicts pleaded not guilty. The courts would have backlog of cases and it would require the intervention of the state to hire or employ more judges in order to be able to solve all the cases. Not opposing or advocating for plea bargains some questions that rings in ones’ mind are who really benefits from plea bargaining and whose rights are undermined, are they for the accused or the defendant?
Who Benefits from Plea Bargaining
The main beneficiary of plea bargaining is the accused who through plea bargaining receives a lighter sentence than the expected if the whole trial process was conducted and the accused was found guilty (Vinegrad, 2010). Plea bargain also works as an advantage to administration since it reduces the workload for the judges, prosecutors, and the defense lawyers. Though this is beneficial to the court system and the government, law experts argue that it denies individual of his constitutional rights. The government officials use their power to force the accused in admitting to guilt (though yet innocent until proven guilty) and remove their rights of undergoing through a fair trial (Lynch, 2003).
Plea bargains also result in less publicity and fewer criminal records thus serving to the advantage of the accused as it is expected (Caldwell, 2010). Among the major disadvantages of plea bargaining is that sometimes innocent defendants can admit guilt due to the fear of the harsh sentence that might follow in case the courts convict him of any wrong doing (Miceli, 2009). The Alford Doctrine is another way in which plea bargaining is reached; this doctrine allows the judge to accept guilty pleas though the defendants maintain innocence or do not agree to the evidence presented before the court of law. Most of the times the defendant can admit guilt due to the fear that the jury may not believe him due to the evidence which has been provided to them (Schaller, nd).
Does Plea Bargaining Sacrifice the Defendant’s Rights or do the Guilty Benefit?
In some instances plea bargaining has been criticized on the fact that sometimes it undermines defendant rights due to the presumption of innocence and self incrimination. It also reduces the power of the court systems in that the system of justice is seen to be unfair as agreements to the negotiated deals lead to less sentences thus denying others justice while rewarding the criminals with less sentences (OECD, 2008).
The 5th amendment of the United States of America does not allow self incrimination under instructions while the 6th amendment ensures that every American citizen has a chance to face an impartial juries thus it beats common sense to our court systems why they should enter into a bargaining plea if one is not guilty. While one might be guilty and still the convicting evidence lack, most of the Americans who are accused of committing crimes forego these basic constitutional rights to plead guilty to cases which the courts might never be able to solve (Lynch, 2003). The truth behind plea bargaining is that it conflicts the provision of the supreme constitution in an effort to overlook institutional processes during trials (Sandefur, 2003).
Advantages of plea bargaining
From the perspective of the attorney representing the accused incase he is a state attorney representing a poor citizen who with the evidence presented has got no chances of escaping a conviction the government attorney can convince the defendant just to plea guilt thus solving him time of going through the whole court process as would be expected during a normal trial.
It reduces the possible maximum sentence for the defendant in case he would have been found guilty of the crimes he was accused of. Thus most suspects prefer plea bargaining since it lessens the time they are supposed to serve in correctional facilities.
Disadvantages
The major undoing of plea bargains is that it releases criminals soon to the streets than expected and to many a long court term serves as an incentive to prevent the accused of committing the crime again. In a contrasting way it may sometimes serve as advantage to the defendant since it ensures the families of the victims are served with justice no matter how little or demeaning it might be since a smart lawyer can convince the jury that even the most wanted criminals are innocent and then the persons are acquitted of any wrong doing (Rein, 2007).
To a hardened criminal, whose chances of recidivism are high plea bargaining serves as a disadvantage to the public as the criminal will be released soon from the prison going back to the public where he may re-commit the crime or even commit a more serious crime this time around. In another perspective of trying to understand who really benefits from a plea bargain.
To the family or the person to whom the crime was committed they can only feel that justice has been done if the a defendant receives the maximum sentence however through bargaining pleas justice is not served as these criminals receive lesser sentences and sooner or later they are released from the prisons and they might go and repeat the crime again.
Conclusion
Though plea bargaining may serve to the advantage of many, from the accused to the court system, minimum sentences for certain criminal acts such as rape and drug abuse should be enacted to ensure even after a plea bargaining the friends and families of the victims feels that they have been served by justice.
Reference List
Caldwell, D.S. (2010). The Benefits of Plea Bargaining. Web.
Hall, E. D; Dolatowski, J.J., & Schmalleger, F. (2010). Criminal Law Today, Fourth Edition. New York: Pearson Education
Lynch, T. (2003). The Case against Plea Bargaining: Cato Institute’s Project on Criminal Justice. Web.
Miceli, T. J. (2009). Plea Bargaining and Settlement of Cartel Cases. Web.
Rein, P. (2007). Who Really Benefits from a Plea Bargain? Web.
Sandefur, T. (2003). In Defense of Plea Bargaining. Web.
Schaller, J. (n.d.). State v. Faraday—DISSENT.Web.
Vinegrad, A. (2010). Justice Department’s new charging: Plea Bargaining and New Sentencing Policy. New York Law Journal volume 243- No. 110.
Weninger, R. (1987). The Abolition of Plea Bargaining: A Case Study of El Paso County, Texas. Web.