Plea Bargaining

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that the most common argument on behalf of plea bargaining is that it reduces the courts' heavy caseloads by ensuring that most criminals enter a plea of guilty, thus eliminating the need for time-consuming trials. The author points out that an argument against plea bargaining is that the public usually favors a disciplinary policy for the handling of criminals in society and wants to see everyone pay for the crime committed. The paper relates that plea bargaining denies the defendant his constitutional right to a trial by jury and asks him to waive his rights against self-incrimination and the right to confront witnesses against him.

From the Paper:

"By having plea bargaining, we are insuring that criminals have to do at least some time for the crime they have committed. Plea bargaining is beneficial to defendants because they use it to reduce the uncertainty and severity of sentencing. If the defendant pleads guilty in return for a compromise, the defendant avoids the risk of a maximum sentence following a guilty verdict at a trial. Other important advantages to plea bargaining is that it allows the defendant a chance to admit their guilt and show some responsibility for the actions they have committed. By allowing a defendant to enter into a plea bargain and plead guilty, the system is shielding victims for having to testify at a trial that may be difficult for them. A trial usually means that a victim will have to relive what happened to them and may damage them."

More papers on Plea Bargaining:

• Argumentative Essay # 120578 : "Plea Bargaining"
• Essay # 83557 : "Plea Bargaining"
• Analytical Essay # 139684 : "Plea Bargaining - Pros and Cons"
• Research Paper # 68171 : "Plea Bargaining"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: