Plea Bargaining and the Judicial System in America - Essay Example

Plea Bargaining The judicial system in America today has come to be dominated by plea bargaining. This has been seen as an importantaspect of the judicial system which keeps it moving. This is because unlike having cases go to full trial, plea bargaining makes it possible for cases to take a shorter time and the court is able to move to the next case preventing the accumulation of unsolved cases. However, despite its advantages on the court in general, the defense and the defendant, it has been seen to be unconstitutional in some way by violating the rights of the defendant to the right to jury trial in the sixth amendment and the right against self incrimination in the fifth amendment (Lippke 2011, 362). This paper addresses the issues surrounding plea bargaining. Research show that 95% of all cases taken to the American court of law are involved in plea bargaining. In plea bargaining, the defendant settles a case on certain stated terms and conditions. The defendant is asked by the prosecution to plead guilty for a certain crime in exchange of maybe a reduced or even suspended sentence. The process starts when a crime is committed. Formal investigation is conducted and this is used in driving the defendant to plead guilty in a court of law. At this point they are informed of their right to have an attorney and given full disclosure on the nature of charges. Plea bargaining has several benefits to the court systems and the defendant. The defendant on one hand is issues with several benefits which entices them to settle. For instance, a defendant facing several multiple charges may who in case of a full trial may get multiple sentences. With plea bargaining such a defendant may succeed in having several of the multiple charges dropped or get reduced sentences (Lippke 2011, 358). This kind of an arrangement have several cost related advantages to the defendant because it reduce the duration taken to resolve a certain case and this come with reduced attorney charges. The defense on the other hand does benefit from this process. This is because plea bargaining involves less work and takes lesser time compared to full court trial but they still get the same kind of pay. The prosecution has the advantage of driving the trial in the manner which they see being most fit for different cases. As a matter of fact, the court system heavily relies on the pleas in order to continue being operation. This is because it makes it possible for a judge to dispose one case within a short time and moves to the next one (Siegel 2010, 231). Plea bargaining also considerably decrease the number of new inmates which has helped to deal with the problem of overcrowding in the incarceration facilities. Despite the positive benefits mentioned above, plea bargaining has its negative effects which undoubtedly impinge on the judicial system as a whole. One disadvantage that comes with plea bargaining is that it leads to the rights of the defendants being forfeited and this unconstitutional. The defendant is constitutionally given the rights. These are the right against self incrimination and the right to a jury trial in the fifth and sixth amendment of the constitution respectively. In plea pleading, the defendants are not only driven to plead guilty but they are also not given the chance to defend themselves in a court of law. Plea bargaining creates an unconstitutional doctrine where the defendant is given some benefits at the expense of giving up their rights which is wrong. Having a benefit as a condition for one to giving to their constitutional right creates a burden problem on that right (Cole et al 2009,76). The process is unfair because in order to get the defendant to concede, the prosecution threatens them with more severe sentences and increased charges if the case goes to trial which may actually not happen. As such, the court system which has been mandated to protect the constitutional rights of the people punishes those who exercise their rights and reward those who fail to do so. In order to further ensure that this happens, the few individuals who decide to take the court in trail are taken in strict review and scrutiny to find any loop holes or flaws that can be used to incriminate the defendant further. The whole process acts as a deterrent to people who decide t have their cases taken to trial. The court is mandated to give a person a full trial carrying out conclusive investigation to prove that the person is actually guilty of a certain crime (Siegel 2010, 239). During the whole period, the defendant is supposed to remain mum until the prosecution can build enough evidence and prove the person guilty. In plea bargaining, the person is forced to plead guilty even in a case where the court cannot build enough evidence to prove him guilty. Plea bargaining been seen an important pillar of the criminal system which cannot be done away with. This is because it offers the various benefits already discussed. Those who support the system assert that it is a good way of utilizing the limited resources in ensuring that justice is served. Without plea bargaining, the legal system would definitely come to a standstill considering it is used to solve 95% of all cases. Although this may be true, one can note that the court has not made any effort to use other method which are not involving as a full trial but allow the accused to exercise their constitutional rights (Boll 2009,175). A jury waiver system where the defendant does not get a full trial but instead gets a bench trial with a judge and not the jury is just as effective as a full trail. However unlike in plea bargaining, in a bench trial, the defendant does not get to self incriminate them, gets to use different witnesses and have time to get right witnesses that will favor them in the case. The bent trial gives the defendant a chance to be heard and get to go through the formal process of determining whether they are guilty. A bench trail utilizes the same resources used in plea bargaining and are less time and money consuming than full trial since it does not involve the jury. Although plea bargaining has several advantages and have come to popular in the courts today, it is obvious that it has dramatic effect on the defendants and robs away the rights of the defendants. In order to uphold the sanctity of the judicial system in upholding law and ensuring justice is served, it should be completely replaced by other processes that uphold the rights of the individual. It is very hypocritical for a system whose work is to protect the rights of the people to be involved in breaking them. References Boll, M. (2009). Plea bargaining and agreement in the criminal process: A comparison between Australia, England and Germany. Hamburg: Diplomica-Verl. Cole, George F., & Smith, Christopher. (2009). The American System of Criminal Justice. Gardners Books. Lippke, R. L. (2011). The ethics of plea bargaining. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Siegel, L. J. (2010). Introduction to criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Read More