Introduction
The plea deal was considered an exclusively American phenomenon for many years, but now this procedure is common in many countries outside the United States. A plea bargain is an agreement whereby a defendant can be granted leniency in exchange for making a confession during a criminal trial (Wilford et al., 2019). The deal may be that the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offense or to the original charge in exchange for a reduced sentence. A plea deal greatly speeds up the process for all parties involved.
Pros and Cons
All participants in the process – the defense attorney, the prosecution, the judge, and the defendant – benefit from avoiding a protracted criminal process. The main advantage for the defendant is the possibility of avoiding a conviction on a more serious charge during the trial. On the other hand, the defendant can be pressured, which is a disadvantage. A plea deal is difficult for a defense attorney, as a specialist faces a serious choice. On the one hand, they benefit from quick trials and maintaining good relations with the prosecutor. On the other hand, the ethical duty of the advocate is to find the best solution for the client’s case. However, the ethics of the profession obliges lawyers to defend each specific client, who at the moment has an advantage over subsequent cases of that lawyer. A lawyer, on the one hand, gets a high chance of a lighter sentence, and on the other hand, may miss other profitable opportunities for the client.
The prosecutor benefits more from the plea deal than the lawyer and the defendant. By making a deal, the defendants plead guilty, but the prosecutor agrees to confirm or admit the facts of the criminal process that affect how the accused will be punished. The prosecutor can get a tougher sentence despite a plea deal (Gormley & Tata, 2021). The judge, in the case of a guilty plea by the accused, receives an accelerated trial and the opportunity to influence the verdict, regardless of the existence of a deal. The downside for the judge is the reputational risk with increased chances of a wrong verdict.
Compulsion to a Plea Deal
The main disadvantage of a plea bargain is the opportunity for coercion of the accused, due to the close relationship between threat and potential reward. Plea deals have been criticized both in the US and elsewhere because they can call into question the correctness of the legal process (Crespo, 2018). For example, an innocent defendant may be pressured into agreeing to a deal in order to receive a reduced sentence, which will result in the real perpetrator not being caught. A plea bargain can become a manipulative move, such as a prosecutor forcing a defendant to confess to a lesser crime when he could have been acquitted due to lack of evidence. The ethical dilemma lies in the manipulation of fear, when even an innocent defendant confesses to lesser crimes, fearing heavy punishment. A plea deal can be considered an act of coercion since the prosecution puts enormous psychological pressure on the accused.
Pressure can be exerted on the accused in both strong cases and weak cases, where there is less evidence, less certainty of guilt, and a jury’s decision. Prosecutors have the power to put pressure on the accused since it is the prosecutors who decide what charges will be brought. Prosecutors can specifically expand the list of alleged crimes so that the accused can more easily make a plea deal. Thus, despite several advantages, a plea deal can result in excessive punishment for both guilty and innocent defendants.
Home Arrest with GPS-Monitoring
GPS-Monitoring devices are used when a suspect, for one reason or another, is released under home arrest. The network of satellites and receiving devices allows us to determine the location of the accused with high accuracy. The advantages of home monitoring include cost-effectiveness, flexibility, accessibility, and potential for use at any stage of the criminal justice process. Its disadvantages include the initial cost, the possibility of escaping or committing a crime, community resistance, and potential loss of the equipment.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The GPS-Monitoring system is widely used due to its undeniable advantages. First of all, it is much more economical than keeping a criminal in prison (Nellis, 2021). GPS systems are highly accurate, which allows the police to always clearly determine the location of the criminal. The tracking bracelet is quite difficult to remove, so the chances of escaping may be low. In addition, all such devices are equipped with an unwanted access control system. At the slightest suspicion that something could go wrong, the device will send out a signal to alert the police. GPS tracking can be applied to a suspect at any point in the investigative process.
One of the main problems of house arrest using monitoring systems is that it is easy to find out where the suspects are, but not what they are doing. For example, an accused of sexual assault may commit violent acts again, the police will only know this after the victim contacts them. The accuracy of the GPS is quite high, but it can be violated if the suspect lives in a remote village, the quality of tracking is also affected by the terrain. It is important to strengthen other security measures if there is a suspicion that the perpetrator is preparing an escape. In the event of an escape from house arrest, the costs of catching a criminal will significantly exceed the potential costs of keeping him in custody.
From an ethical point of view, the use of tracking devices during house arrest may violate the rights and freedoms of suspects. If the suspect is not convicted, the use of monitoring systems deprives them of the right to freedom of movement. The use of GPS systems is a violation of privacy (Irtaimeh, 2022). Those involved in the case may not be aware of the need to preserve information and therefore may violate the suspect’s right to privacy. Thus, before using GPS-Monitoring during house arrest, it is necessary to think not only about safety but also about moral and ethical considerations.
Conclusion
Sexual crimes are a major public concern in the field of offenses. The use of GPS-Monitoring to track offenders charged with sexual offenses is becoming widespread but continues to inspire public fear. Although GPS is a valuable tool, it is not a panacea or a substitute for surveillance, which includes personal contact of an employee with the offender, employer, and family members. Applicability GPS-Monitoring must be individually adapted to the level of risk associated with the offender (McJunkin & Prescott, 2018). In the case of sexual offenses, there is a high risk of a recurrence of the episode. This becomes especially dangerous if the offender is released under home arrest. GPS-Monitoring allows the police to know exactly the location, but not what the offender is doing at one time or another. Sexual offenses are a serious breach of the peace, so offenders should not be released under house arrest. Public safety and tranquility must be of paramount importance in resolving this issue.
References
Crespo, A. M. (2018). The hidden law of plea bargaining.Columbia Law Review, 118(5), 1303-1424. Web.
Gormley, J., & Tata, C. (2021). Remorse and sentencing in a world of plea bargaining 1. In Remorse and Criminal Justice (pp. 40-66). Routledge.
Irtaimeh, W. S. (2022). Electronic monitoring as a measure to reduce the use of pre-trial detention.Journal of Politics and Law, 15(4), 210-229. Web.
McJunkin, B. A., & Prescott, J. J. (2018). Fourth Amendment constraints on the technological monitoring of convicted sex offenders.New Criminal Law Review, 21(3), 379-425. Web.
Nellis, M. (2021). Towards predictivity? Immediacy and imminence in the electronic monitoring of offenders. In The Pre-Crime Society: Crime, Culture and Control in the Ultramodern Age, 341-401. Policy Press.
Wilford, M. M., Shestak, A., & Wells, G. L. (2019). Plea bargaining. In N. Brewer & AB Douglass, Psychological science and the law, 266-292. The Guilford Press.