Issue 504 Plea bargains: should they be scrapped? January 13, 2015

Plea bargaining (where a defendant pleads guilty so that they get a lighter sentence) has come under fire as of late. And this may be so with good reason.  So let us discuss.  (Inspiration for this issue comes from the October 4th issue of the Economist)

Why plea bargain?:  The primary reason for the plea bargain is so that an accused individual can reduce their sentence in jail.  This works by the prosecutors offering shorter sentences in behind closed door meeting toward defendants.  Due to this, many courts have reduced costs and the government has saved thousands of dollars.  However, this power that the prosecutors have has been likened to a defending attorney bribing a witness.  According to the economist article Jed Rakoff (a district judge in New York) thinks it is unlikely the 95% of the defendants are guilty.  Rakoff believes that it is possible thousands of innocent people have been put behind bars because they wanted to avoid the mandatory minimum sentences for say 30 years in jail (if a trial was conducted normally) for a lighter five to 10 year sentence with a plea bargain. So basically, this power has been both good and bad for people all around when it comes to the criminal justice system. 

Solution:  The primary solution as proposed is to have a separate arbitrator or judge oversee the plea bargain process.  The goal is to remove the prosecutor from the lead role and that the independent arbitrator will make the deals with the defendant(s) instead if a plea bargain becomes the prefered option.  This allows for the plea bargaining process to continue without say an individual going to jail for a crime they did not commit (or at the very least reducing the chance of such an event occurring).  Obviously there's more detail to this, but you get the general premise that preventing an innocent person going to jail (especially in a case they can actually win) is preferable to the status quo.

Conclusion:  While I cannot say I am an expert on such matters, it is clear to me based on the articles I have read that there is room for reform in America's judicial system.  While I get that we want to keep costs down, it is no excuse to allow an innocent person go to jail based on fear of a heftier sentence.