Introduction
“A Plea Bargain is an agreement in a criminal case between prosecutor and defendant that typically involves the defendant agreement to plead guilty, often to lesser offense or to a reduced sentence that has been agreed upon in advance” (http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/plea-bargain-pros-and-cons.html? version=2). Plea bargain has been gaining attention because it has become an issue between people. On how plea bargain is affecting the court system, plea bargain has been in this nation for many of years. Throughout these years there have been a lot of growth in people using the plea bargain. Making people believe if plea bargain is a good method for the court system or if it isn’t. Which creates an argument between people because for some people this method has a lot of negative reasons why is wrong for the court system. Yet, just like there are a lot of negative reasons why this method is wrong there are also people who argue that this method has a lot of positive reasons why it works for the court system. Having this argument in the nation is creating an issue because people aren’t really sure which one is correct causing a lot of discussion if the court is functioning the way it supposed to.
Background of Plea Bargain
Plea bargain has been around for a long time, existing even before the civil war period. Protecting defendants from receiving a bigger punishment from their crimes. “One of the earliest indications of plea bargaining was a 1485 English statue, which authorized prosecutions for unlawful hunting before the Justice of the Peace. The statute provided that if a defendant confessed his crime then he was convicted of a summary offense, but if the defendant denied his guilt then he was prosecuted as a felon”(Mackenzie, Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2015). The plea-bargaining was already in used ever since the beginning of the nation. Yet no one would actually used it and when they did it wouldn’t passed by the court. “However, many of the courts disapproved of practice plea bargaining because of its secrecy and infringement of the defendant’s rights”(Mackenzie, Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2015). The court didn’t use plea bargain in the old times because of the same reasons. People argue today, because the plea bargain doesn’t follow the rules of the constitution. Plea bargain was an issue in the old times and the Supreme Court would always disapprove it even though the defendants would use it. Everything change after the World War II when “The re-emergence of plea bargaining was due to a couple of factors: 1) the “crime wave” of the 1960s produced by the World War II baby boom and the increased proportion of young people in society, and 2) the increase in drug usage (especially marijuana) and other cases of victimless crime”(Mackenzie, Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2015). World War II brought the plea bargain back because of those two reasons, giving the defendants chance to be able to use plea bargain. Ever since that period of time plea bargain has been growing in the court system. Which is bringing a lot of critics to people who don’t agree with situation.
Negative Critics of Plea Bargain
Politicians argue on the way plea bargain could have a lot more negative reasons than positive reasons on the way it works in court. Three of the main negative reasons are that politicians argue that plea bargain is bad because of the way the court handles the cases. “ Because of the pressure numbers, there often a unanimity among defense counsel, trail judge, and prosecutor in pushing criminal defendants through the system as quickly as possible”(Palmer, 1999). There are a lot of arguments on how the court accepts the plea bargain so the case could be process faster and the court members don’t have to deal with the case at all. The other negative reason why plea bargain is criticize by researchers is because it doesn’t follows what the constitution states. “The defendant is encouraged to waive his constitutional right to trail in lieu of receiving a harsher sentence at trail. The defendant also waives his privilege against self-incrimination and the right to confront adverse witnesses”(Palmer, 1999). For politicians defendants aren’t following the constitution because there are no trails and no witnesses. Plus they are also not receiving their constitutional rights. Concluding that plea bargain is breaking the constitution by not giving the defendants what the constitution is asking. Lastly, another negative statement that politicians mentions is that plea bargain isn’t fair for the victims because the defendants are not receiving the right punishment that they deserve. “Perhaps most significant is the lack of transparency and the public’s perceived of lack of fairness which ultimately translate in to complete lack of trust in the efficaciousness of the entire system”(Mackenzie, Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2015). For the victims, plea bargain isn’t fair because defendant could escape from their real punishment. By choosing to do a plea bargain, which makes the punishment less harsh. Furthermore, researchers are continuing to find more reasons why plea bargain is affecting the court system in the nation. Trying to find a way to eliminate it from the court system.
Positive Critics of Plea Bargain
There are three main positive results that plea bargain can give to the court system; one positive result is being able to make the court system flexible. For example, courts have a lot of cases to handle and to be able to shorting a case with a plea bargain is easier than handling it with it. “Plea bargaining advocates point to the fact that criminal caseloads commonly doubled from one decade to the next, while judicial resources increased only slightly”(Palmer, 1999). Another positive result from plea bargain is it protects the defendant from a harsh punishment. “The concessions will make possible will make possible alternative correctional measures which are better adapted to achieving rehabilitative, protective, deterrent or other purposes of correctional treatment, or will prevent undue harm to the defendant from the form of conviction”(Palmer, 1999). If a defendant is guilty and the punishment is big, the plea bargain helps the defendant with minimizing the punishment. The last positive result that plea bargain gives to the court system is it makes sure that a defendant isn’t mistaken when it comes to guilty or not guilty. For example, if the court somehow gives a verdict wrong to a defendant. The defendant is going to get a bigger punishment. So for that reason plea bargain is a positive result for the court because innocent defendants are getting protective from a punishment they don’t deserve. Overall, plea bargain have a lot of positive reasons why it helps the court and defendants.
Conclusion
In conclusion, plea bargain has been a law that keeps on helping the defendants on being able to receive a less punishment if they plea guilty. Even though plea bargain is being used more in the court system and for a lot of defendants it helps them. There is a lot of negative critics on why plea bargain isn’t a good law for the court system. One of the main critics is that it isn’t fair for the victims. Because the defendants aren’t receiving the right punishment if they get plea bargain, they are getting a much less punishment. Just like there are negative critics there are also positive critics stating that this law is good for the court system. One of those positive reasons why plea bargain is positive for the court system is because defendants could actually be punish less if there is a misunderstanding in court. For example if the defendant is actually not guilty from a crime and the court states that he is guilty. The plea bargain can protect the defendant from receiving a harsh punishment that they don’t deserve. Lastly, plea bargain has been creating a big issue in the court system because there are a lot of critics that aren’t agreeing with plea bargain, which could result a big problem in court if there isn’t a solution for it.