The first time offender might get a second chance with a non-conviction program and be scared straight. The benefits of the bargaining system here are obvious. While most prosecutors do consider victims of the crime in bargaining, it is a case by case basis on whether or not the prosecutor will consult the victim before reaching a bargain with the defendant. It is likely that the bargaining system will continue to be practiced within our criminal system for a long time to come. I disagree with plea bargaining for the fact that if they did something once and get a plea bargain many will think of it as they got away with something, also they may think if they do something again they will think they can get another plea bargain deal.
Prosecutors are responsible to make sure the guilty person is prosecuted and that innocent people are protected from unwarranted prosecution. Prosecutors decide which types of plea bargains to enter and can ask the court to dismiss the charges. Prosecutors have more discretion than any other legal person including judges. A prosecutor’s position is much more difficult than portrayed on television. On television, the prosecutor, or ADA comes in tries the case and leaves.
However advantages of a Jury include; Jury includes common values and not just upon evidence as a factor in determining the verdict. Another argument for juries is that there is a large number of people deciding the verdict therefore more varied opinion. They also may do a better job in judging the character and honesty of the accused than the Judge or magistrate. Although the jury system contains flaws, the verdict is still based on varied viewpoints as opposed to the single viewpoint of the judge. If there is a background check done on anyone chosen to be a juror, it will reduce some flaws in the system.
The jury returned with a verdict of guilty but the defendant’s conviction was quashed on appeal because of the judge’s interference. Modern Day Use of Juries Only a small percentage of cases are tried by Jury today. Juries are used in the following courts: Court | Type of Case | Role | Number of Jury | Crown Court | Serious Criminal Cases: e.g. murder, manslaughter, rape | Decide the verdict - Guilty or Not Guilty | 12 | High Court | Defamation, False Imprisonment, Malicious prosecution and any case alleging fraud | Decide Liability. If fined for the claimant also decide amount of damages.
Another major point is that our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. This contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. Has one ever thought of the victim’s family when the whole court cases are going on?
Other things equal they prefer to pay more for stocks that are more risky and have uncertain cash flows. • Investors are risk averse. Other things equal they prefer to pay more for stocks that are less risky and that have relatively certain cash flows than other stocks. When determining the value of a firm, which of the following statements is ture? • A financial asset is considered to have value if it has the ability to generate positive cash flows.
I think if a wealthy person has the means to pay restitution to help the family and at the same time this reduces or helps them avoid a sentence, I am ok with it. I think the victim deserves to be compensated and locking up a person who has means is not always the best idea since this person has substantial income; this can only be to the benefit of the victim. If I were the victim, I would rather receive restitution than see the person locked up in prison. I think a hit to the pocket book may sometimes create more of an impact, especially to a person of means,
When a defendant accepts a plea bargain the defense team has the advantage of less work with the same pay that he or she would have received if the case had gone to trial, prosecutors get the guilty plea that he or she was working to obtain, and the court system can move through cases at a faster pace. These advantages allow the court system to stay ahead of the mounting cases presented, making the trial process faster. Prisons and other incarceration facilities can also see a reduction of criminals being incarcerated, which helps with overcrowding in these facilities.Plea bargains have advantages that affect all players in the criminal justice system but disadvantages are also present in this process. Critics of the plea bargain will suggest
In the end the judicial system saves money, both with the time of trials and appeals, as well as reduced charges or sentences that ultimately lead to less time the tax payer has to pay for incarceration. It is true that the rights of the accused are essential within the Constitution, but in my opinion I feel that the accused have given up their right in using plea bargaining and admitting their guilt. If an individual wishes to invoke their rights guaranteed by the Constitution they have the right to all the liberties that are included in that type of trial. Yet, if an individual pleads guilty and wishes to plea bargain, this process should take precedent over the Constitutional right that has been given up with the provision that the accused could retain that right if they so desired. In the end, plea bargaining is an effective tool both for law enforcement, the prosecution, the judicial system, and can benefit the accused as well.
In a civil case it is up to the plaintiff, the person who has started the lawsuit to prove his or her case with stronger evidence than the defendant has that is, by preponderance of the evidence. Simply put for the plaintiff to win the judge or jury must believe that the plaintiff’s evidence is greater than that of the defendant. In a criminal case the burden of proof is much higher than that of a civil case. In a criminal case the accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. The prosecution must prove the case beyond a shadow of a doubt.