4 ms·
For minor cases, it costs less to plea guilty outright. But this often holds true for even major crimes. Plea guilty: Get 90 day suspended sentence, pay fines
by BearGoesChirp 10y ago
For minor cases, it costs less to plea guilty outright.
But this often holds true for even major crimes.
Plea guilty: Get 90 day suspended sentence, pay fines of $1000.
Fight case: Chance of 10 years in prison, pay $10,000 to lawyer guaranteed, chance of fines of $10,000.
Add in a prosecutor who is fighting dirty, which would you pick?
The problem is that trumped up charges, being offered significantly reduced plea deals, the cost of fighting the charges, and how awful public defenders are (regardless of fault) all combine into a nightmare where very few are willing to demand their right to trial.
To me the simplest solution is to end plea deals because they are effectively a punishment for insisting on a right. Cutting the sentence by 90% if someones takes a plea is the same as increasing a sentence by 1000% if someone demands on their right to a trial. This should not be allowed.
- mikeash 10y agoI totally agree, plea deals are effectively a punishment for invoking your right to a trial. People should absolutely be allowed to plead guilty, but they shouldn't be rewarded for it. The only argument I've seen for plea deals is that they save time and money. Which I'm sure is true, but is that really sufficient reason to mess with people's right to a trial?
- BearGoesChirp 10y agoPlea deals do save time and money, but at what expense? They allow for courts to try more cases that they would otherwise ignore as insignificant. They allow those who commit major crimes to get off with much lighter sentences (I've read about child sexual abuse cases pleading down to child endangerment, which raises far less flags on a background check). They also allow people to be bludgeoned into accepting charges they are innocent of. I just don't see how people can justify it at all.
- sametmax 10y agoBut in any country without plea guilt deal like mine, you have only once choice : the trial with full cost and the possible high sentence. I don't get what you loose with the deal, it's just an additional option.
- mikeash 10y agoFor any individual case, you don't lose by having the option available. But more options doesn't always lead to better outcomes, see the Prisoners' Dilemma for the classic example. In this situation, having lots of plea deals predisposes the system to increase sentences for cases which go to trial, in order to get more plea deals. If every single person gets the harsher "trial" punishment, then there will be pressure to make the punishment fit the crime. When only 6% of people get that one, and 94% get a lighter sentence due to a plea deal, the "trial" punishment can be way worse. For a really obvious and somewhat contrived example of how more options isn't necessarily a good thing, imagine if you could get a discount on your taxes if you agreed never to criticize the government. You don't have to take that choice, and you lose nothing by having it available, but I think most of us would see that program as a really bad thing.
- sametmax 10y ago> In this situation, having lots of plea deals predisposes the system to increase sentences for cases which go to trial, in order to get more plea deals. ... > if you could get a discount on your taxes if you agreed never to criticize the government. Ah ok. The problem is not the deal itself, but that the system's goal then lead to utilize the deal in negative ways.
- mikeash 10y agoI think that's right. A plea deal in any given case may be OK, but when they're a pervasive part of the system they start to look like a punishment for insisting on a trial.
- jdietrich 10y agoIn England, there's no such thing as a plea deal, but a guilty plea is taken into account at sentencing. It's tacitly understood that you'll get a modest reduction in your sentence if you plead guilty, but there's no explicit guarantee. It's enough to induce pleas from the obviously guilty, but it won't sway anyone who stands a chance of winning a trial. The American system is clearly not serving justice, as we saw in the Swartz case. The gulf between plea deals and sentences at trial can only be explained by an intention to coerce innocent men into pleading guilty.
- Markoff 10y agobut won't you have then some criminal record affecting your employment options? never heard about this in Europe that people would be admitting guilt for something they haven't done
- morrisworms 10y agoIN SEARCH OF A HACKER? A senior member of IceFog,who is a professional in the following services: * Hack and access DATA FROM ANY COMPANY WEBSITES * FUND TRANSFER FROM ANY BANK WEBSITE * HACK AND UPGRADE UNIVERSITY GRADES * SALES OF HACKING SOFTWARES & ONLINE TUTORIALS * HACK INTO YOUR PARTNER’S FACEBOOK ACCOUNT without their knowledge/Notification * Hack into any GOVERNMENT AGENCY WEBSITE * HIJACK A USERNAME & PASSWORD TO ACCESS ANY SITE * Hack into SECURITY AGENCY WEBSITE and ERASE CRIMINAL RECORDS * HACK AND OBTAIN CASH ADVANCES * HACK AND OBTAIN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER * Hack into any DATA BASE * Hack PAYPAL ACCOUNT, MASTERCARD, AMERICAN EXPRESS etc. * SERVER CRASHED hack * WE ARE EXPERTS IN DATA AND FILES RECOVERY… * HACK BANK ATM CARD, PIN and PASSWORD DEVELOPMENT University grades changing Website crashed hack server crashed hack Erase criminal records hack Databases hack Sales of Dumps cards of all kinds Untraceable IP Individual computers hack Websites hack Control devices remotely hack Burner Numbers hack Skype hack Credit cards hacker * Hack into any BANK WEBSITE * Hack into any COMPANY WEBSITE * Hack into any GOVERNMENT AGENCY WEBSITE * Hack into SECURITY AGENCY WEBSITE and ERASE CRIMINAL RECORDS * Hack into any DATA BASE * Hack PAYPAL ACCOUNT * Hack WORDPRESS Blogs * SERVER CRASHED hack * Untraceable IP etc * We can restore LOST FILES AND DOCUMENTS. Contact me via: tappanmorrisworms@gmail.com