Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of plea bargaining in criminal trials
Importance of plea bargaining
The importance of the plea bargain process
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role of plea bargaining in criminal trials
Intro
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
Plea bargaining precludes justice from being achieved, where the consent to less severe sentences are given in favour of time and money. The case of R v Rogerson and McNamara, demonstrates the advantages of hiring highly trained legal personnel, which inevitably contributed to their lesser sentence. Thus, making it more difficult for offenders to be convicted.
…show more content…
This is demonstrated in the case of R v Rogerson and McNamara where two former police officers, Roger Rogerson and Glen McNamara were convicted to life imprisonment based on the murder of Sydney student, Jamie Gao in 2014. Due to the nature of the law, the offenders presumption of innocence was upheld until their conviction in September 2016. Consequently, it created a tedious trial and sentencing process, where extortionate amounts of money were attributed to aspects, such as a judge and jury fees. Additionally, time is also a negative element in this instance where cases under the presumption of innocence, involve extensive hours of litigation and hence an increase in taxpayers
There is no dispute that Mr.Nanokeesic showed an attempt to prevent the police from finding the weapon, when he ran from the police and discarded his backpack. The backpack was found by the police and searched, without a warrant.
middle of paper ... ... (Mohr 6) For prosecutors, “guilty pleas avoided ‘onerous and protracted’ trials whose outcomes – ‘losing’ or ‘having to oppose an appeal to the higher courts’ – were both undesirable.” (Smith 134) Finally for judges, plea bargaining reduces their caseload, and elevates their reputation indirectly because accepting a plea bargaining also includes waiver of appeal to higher courts. (Mohr 6) Criticism of plea bargaining mainly stems from two aspects.
Plea bargaining is a tool used in the court system for the benefit and detriment of the accused for numerous reasons. Additionally, the Crown will use plea bargaining for their benefit as well. For the purposes of this paper I intend to focus on the benefits and risks for an accused person to accept a plea bargain.
The merits of both the adversarial and inquisitorial system will be explored throughout this paper. The Australian rule of law best describes as all law should be applied equally and fairly. The five vital operations of the rule of law includes fairness, rationality, predictability, consistency, and impartially. The adversarial system adopts these operations by having a jury decide on the verdict and the judge being an impartial decision maker. In contrast, the inquisitorial system relies heavily on the judge. This can result in abusive power and bias of the judge when hearing evidence and delivering verdicts. The operations of the rule of law determine why the rule of law is best served by the adversarial system in Australia.
R N Howie and P A Johnson, Annotated Criminal Legislation NSW, 2011-2102, (Lexis Nexis Butterworths 2012) 17769-1774
The National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals set a limit that each criminal defense attorney can take 150 felony cases per year, but “caseloads of 500, 600, 800, or more are common” (“Five Problems”). With that, criminal defense attorneys are forced to triage or reject cases, leaving potential clients to go to court without representation. If the defendant does have a public attorney, their defense is unprepared and vulnerable to make mistakes when working out a reasonable sentence. In one of his cases, Jones and his client accepted a deal with the prosecution for a three year sentence for stealing locks. Upon further investigation, the prosecution discovered that they made a mistake in calculating the minimum sentence – Jones’s client should have only served “366 days,” but it was already too late (Eckholm).
During this process both parties have to compromise; the prosecutors will lower the charges and will suggest a minimum sentence to the judge if the defendant pleas guilty to the lesser charge. On the The Criminal Justice System: Part III Courts, there is a difference between the publics perspective and the reality. The publics view on the criminal justice system is a picture that is been painted by the media as a fight between police and robbers, and the court is the bottle feel. Many have the misconception that prosecutors and defense attorneys are enemies and that dislike each other. The reality is that both prosecutor and the defense attorney work together everyday to solve cases. Plea deals is an example of the collaboration between both parties to arrive to a happy median. As stated on the book is estimated that over 90% of cases end up in a plea deal. This mass production of plea deals helps the court system to stay clear, the prosecutor to close more cases and the defense attorney to work faster, but what happens with the person who’s life is being agreed on? Every so often people plea guilty to crimes they did not commit, because they are convinced is the fastest, easiest and more inexpensive way to get out. In other cases, offenders just agreed on the deal because it offered them a lesser sentence. Either way, plea
Plea bargains are one of the most controversial debates that are discussed over the criminal justice court system. A plea bargain is when a defendant agrees to plead guilty to a crime and in exchange for something, for example a lesser sentence. There are three types of plea bargains. Charge bargaining is when a defendant pleads guilty to a less serious charge than the original charge. Count bargaining is when the defendant pleads guilty for some of the charge, but not all. Sentence bargaining is when the defendants get a lesser sentence than the maximum penalty. Through the course of this semester it has been brought to our attention, multiple times, about the problems plea bargaining has caused. Many defendants are pressured by those who surround them in
Punishment, when speaking on serious terms, is socially valuable because it deters criminals from repeating their crimes and may keep others from repeating the same acts. If in fact the deterring effect misses its point, it is the fault of the justice system the all the red tape found behind it. At its current standing, the system is viewed as a joke because no authority is taken, no one believes, let alone fears, the system. Both the lengthy time and the high expense result from innumerable appeals, including many technicalities which have little nothing to do with the question of guilt or innocence. If these wasteless amount of appeals were eliminated or at least controlled, then the procedure would be much shorter, less expensive and more
Plea deals help everyone but I must also point out, that these plea deals also have its pitfalls. There are sometimes too light of sentences that are handed out, just to have a quick resolution, and come to find out, that the defendant has later committed an eve...
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
Riordan, Kate. “Ten Angry Men: Unanimous Jury Verdicts in Criminal Trials and Incorporation After Mcdonald.”Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 101.4 (2011): 1403-1433. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.
Garrett, Brandon. Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2011. 86. Print.
“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).
...nts that they feel they often have no choice but to plea guilty and accept the bargain. Prosecutors can exploit the consequences produced by adversarial legalism in a way that allows them to process a high volume of cases and obtain a large number of guilty pleas. The systematic changes to civil and criminal law in an attempt to avoid the negative outcomes of adversarial legalism only makes the system less useful for citizens.