Plea-bargaining can mean many things to many people, in and out of the courtroom. Let us first start by defining plea bargain. Plea bargain is defined an agreement in which the defendant enters a guilty plea in exchange for a reduced sentence. This is the technical meaning, but as I stated before, the word plea bargain can mean very different things to very different people.
To the accused, the word plea bargain means a freedom of choice. To the prosecutor, it means a lesser workload. To the Judge, it means saving his time and the courts time, and to the state, a plea bargain means saving money. In my perception, the word plea bargain means a failure of the American trial system. The Constitution grants us, the citizens of this country, a right to speedy trial by jury of our peers. Where exactly do you see that right, which is rightfully ours, in plea bargains? How can our trial and court system not bestow the punishment that fits the crime? When we give the accused freedom of choice, isn’t that an oxymoron?
The only effectiveness I can see in the court system plea bargains is that solely the courts are benefitting from them. The courts save time, money and the prosecutors save themselves from a huge workload. Plea bargains have no effectiveness on the justice. How are the victims given justice if the accused gets a far lesser sentence and punishment than is fairly just? How can the accused learn their lesson when they have the freedom to choose a lesser punishment? How does the public perceive our trial system as fair and just when plea bargains are being over used to save time and money?
Plea bargaining is not a useful tool. The court systems, in order to save themselves from a trial, “…forces the party into a situation where they have to take a guess about what the evidence is, about how strong the case might be, and they have to make that guess against the background of enormously...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document