3 ms·
It seems to me that a few things are needed: 1. Limiting the 'trial penalty' to 25% or so of the sentence 2. Banning pleas that involve dropping charges in exc
by roxgib 4y ago
It seems to me that a few things are needed:
1. Limiting the 'trial penalty' to 25% or so of the sentence
2. Banning pleas that involve dropping charges in exchange for pleading to others
3. Proper funding for public defenders
The first and second are to solve the problem that prosecutors overcharge and defence lawyers advise innocent clients to plead guilty rather than risk significant jail time fight bogus charges. This seems to be a common tactic by prosecutors in the US and it should simply be banned through these mechanisms.
Of course the other problem is that people can't defend themselves against bogus charges because the cost is ruinous, so proper funding for public defenders is important.
- derekp7 4y agoOr, have an all or nothing conviction standard. Either the defendant is convicted of all charges, or is fully acquitted if even one charge is found not guilty. That would force prosecutors to only bring on their strongest case.
- techdragon 4y agoWhile a valid, this one has, I feel, less chance of getting through the political machine and ever happening. It’s too easy to oppose it in bad faith with arguments like “they want murderers to go free because we can’t prove they <insert a derisive related minor charge here, like stealing, or jaywalking> It’s harder to argue against “not bringing bullshit charges” even though in practice the outcome of your version would simply be the lawyers/prosecutors don’t bring bullshit, it’s the political downside that, I suspect, would doom it.
- ekam 4y agoDifferent charges have different standards and language so this makes zero sense