5 ms·

"I don’t get how you see plea bargaining as the evil thing in that scenario." Because you don't get one of the fundamental constitutional rights our country wa

"I don’t get how you see plea bargaining as the evil thing in that scenario." Because you don't get one of the fundamental constitutional rights our country was founded on: The right to a jury. Prosecutors should be forced to face a jury.

SilasX 9y ago
And you don’t get that that’s a right, not an obligation. A right can be waived (in return for a consideration), an obligation can’t. In a plea bargain, the state is recognizing your right to a trial; that’s why they can’t just give you the punishment directly! They are offering a reduced sentence in exchange for you waiving that right. At no point is the right not recognized, unless you think that’s what happens with guilty pleas too. (Edited to provide explanation rather than funny but confusing skit.)
- gozur88 9y ago
  The problem is the prosecutors have an incentive to rack up as many patently ridiculous charges as possible in an effort to strengthen their position in the plea bargain. Something relatively minor balloons into the possibility you could spend the rest of your life in jail... or you could take the plea and be out in a few years. That effectively removes your right to a jury trial, particularly when the natural human tendency of a juror is to split the baby, i.e. if you get charged with 60 counts they're unlikely to find you "not guilty" on all 60 regardless of circumstances. I agree with OP - if the crime isn't important enough to take to trial, it's not important enough to prosecute. Furthermore I would add judges should sanction prosecutors for overcharging. If I have $100k in cash I put into the bank in $5k increments that's one charge of Structuring with a potential five year sentence - I shouldn't be looking at twenty charges with a century in jail if I refuse the plea.
  - SilasX 9y ago
    That still seems like more of a problem with overcharging and absurd penalties, rather than plea bargaining. Did you see the question about whether you would feel the same way if the charge and possible punishment were reasonable? Edit: and the comparison to guilty pleas?
    - gozur88 9y ago
      If the outcome of the plea bargain is about what the defendant would expect after conviction on reasonable charges, plea bargaining would be fine. But that's fantasyland. The problem is the incentives are set up such that the charges will not be reasonable. They can't be reasonable, since the state can't possibly afford to take more than a tiny percentage of cases to trial. Which sets up another incentive - the state must make an example out of people who demand a trial to encourage everyone else to take the plea.
    - joshlemer 9y ago
      I don't know where else to post this question, but why can I not reply to some comments in this thread? For example I can reply to this comment, but I cannot reply to gozur88's comment beneath yours. To gozur88 if you see this, I am pretty worried about this too, and it seems like a huge violation of our rights that charges can be placed on individuals simply for leverage in a negotiation between the state and the individual. It is actually pretty absurd that we allow any kind of negotiation whatsoever in criminal courts because the usual principles of consent that are usually prerequisites to legally binding negotiations are absent. An individual is threatened with violence and then from that position are not on equal footing with the prosecution.
      - gozur88 9y ago
        >I don't know where else to post this question, but why can I not reply to some comments in this thread? For example I can reply to this comment, but I cannot reply to gozur88's comment beneath yours. There's an increasing delay between when a comment is posted and when you can reply, based on the depth. The idea is to create a "cooldown" period for people who are upset. You would have been able to reply to my comment eventually.
      - mercer 9y ago
        If I understand correctly sometimes there's a delay before you can reply to a comment. I don't think it's "always on", but specifically for threads with a lot of discussion.
      - detaro 9y ago
- ransom1538 9y ago
  "And you don’t get that that’s a right, not an obligation" Horrifying. Ok. So slavery is back in the game. Hey, sign this and if you don't meet the requirements you are a slave -- you are "waiving that right". I am sure you are trolling.... right?
  - dang 9y ago
    "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

SilasX 9y ago

And you don’t get that that’s a right, not an obligation. A right can be waived (in return for a consideration), an obligation can’t. In a plea bargain, the state is recognizing your right to a trial; that’s why they can’t just give you the punishment directly! They are offering a reduced sentence in exchange for you waiving that right. At no point is the right not recognized, unless you think that’s what happens with guilty pleas too. (Edited to provide explanation rather than funny but confusing skit.)

gozur88 9y ago
The problem is the prosecutors have an incentive to rack up as many patently ridiculous charges as possible in an effort to strengthen their position in the plea bargain. Something relatively minor balloons into the possibility you could spend the rest of your life in jail... or you could take the plea and be out in a few years. That effectively removes your right to a jury trial, particularly when the natural human tendency of a juror is to split the baby, i.e. if you get charged with 60 counts they're unlikely to find you "not guilty" on all 60 regardless of circumstances. I agree with OP - if the crime isn't important enough to take to trial, it's not important enough to prosecute. Furthermore I would add judges should sanction prosecutors for overcharging. If I have $100k in cash I put into the bank in $5k increments that's one charge of Structuring with a potential five year sentence - I shouldn't be looking at twenty charges with a century in jail if I refuse the plea.
- SilasX 9y ago
  That still seems like more of a problem with overcharging and absurd penalties, rather than plea bargaining. Did you see the question about whether you would feel the same way if the charge and possible punishment were reasonable? Edit: and the comparison to guilty pleas?
  - gozur88 9y ago
    If the outcome of the plea bargain is about what the defendant would expect after conviction on reasonable charges, plea bargaining would be fine. But that's fantasyland. The problem is the incentives are set up such that the charges will not be reasonable. They can't be reasonable, since the state can't possibly afford to take more than a tiny percentage of cases to trial. Which sets up another incentive - the state must make an example out of people who demand a trial to encourage everyone else to take the plea.
  - joshlemer 9y ago
    I don't know where else to post this question, but why can I not reply to some comments in this thread? For example I can reply to this comment, but I cannot reply to gozur88's comment beneath yours. To gozur88 if you see this, I am pretty worried about this too, and it seems like a huge violation of our rights that charges can be placed on individuals simply for leverage in a negotiation between the state and the individual. It is actually pretty absurd that we allow any kind of negotiation whatsoever in criminal courts because the usual principles of consent that are usually prerequisites to legally binding negotiations are absent. An individual is threatened with violence and then from that position are not on equal footing with the prosecution.
    - gozur88 9y ago
      >I don't know where else to post this question, but why can I not reply to some comments in this thread? For example I can reply to this comment, but I cannot reply to gozur88's comment beneath yours. There's an increasing delay between when a comment is posted and when you can reply, based on the depth. The idea is to create a "cooldown" period for people who are upset. You would have been able to reply to my comment eventually.
    - mercer 9y ago
      If I understand correctly sometimes there's a delay before you can reply to a comment. I don't think it's "always on", but specifically for threads with a lot of discussion.
    - detaro 9y ago
ransom1538 9y ago
"And you don’t get that that’s a right, not an obligation" Horrifying. Ok. So slavery is back in the game. Hey, sign this and if you don't meet the requirements you are a slave -- you are "waiving that right". I am sure you are trolling.... right?
- dang 9y ago
  "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html