1- Answer the discussion question and check the question 1 "The criminal goes free because the constable blundered." This is a common adage used to describe the exclusionary rule. The police did wrong by violating her constitutional rights so a defendant, even though she may be guilty, may end up without punishment. Similarly, plea bargains in criminal cases and settlements in civil cases are compromises. Neither side receives a full measure of justice. All of this is done to preserve the administration of justice -- not the rights of the parties or the interests of the public. Since the majority of all cases -- civil and criminal -- are resolved in this manner, does this mean that there really is no justice in American courts? Are there better ways of doing things without forcing a collapse of the justice system? Consider the discussions on abolition of the exclusionary rule and abolition of plea bargaining.

2- You need to read this answer and if you are agree with him and what do u Think about his statement like agree or disagree why or why not?

Response 1: Hale

When being offered a plea bargain, the defendant is essentially being pressured into waiving their right to trial. If the defendant chooses to go to trial, the prosecutor is basically threatening a stiffer penalty in the interest of speeding-up and reducing their caseload. This does not give the victim or plaintiff justice because the defendant is getting receiving a lighter sentence than they would have received. It could also hurt the defendant, because if they are not truly guilty, they may feel coerced into cutting their losses if the prosecution or plaintiff has a better case against them

This is a fair system though because it can go both ways. If a defendant has overwhelming evidence against them, and there is no reasonable doubt that they are guilty. This could also be fair to a plaintiff or prosecutor, and be to their advantage in the event that they have a weak case. It involves negotiation. The victim or plaintiff could have some type of retribution, even if they did not prove the preponderance of evidence or guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This also cuts costs to the court, and overall, the general public

An alternative to plea-bargaining would be waiving a jury-trial and sitting before a judge in a bench-trial. Not only would this expedite administrative court procedures, but the defendant can still have their case heard, and they can still keep their right to not self-incriminate intact. The defendant will be adequately represented and the judge will decide the outcome of the case

Response 2: Peterson

This system of presumed compromise necessarily distorts notions of justice. If the defendant is guilty of the crime with which she is charged, she is getting away with a lesser penalty than she deserves. She may not be deterred from future crime; the public does not receive adequate retribution for the crime; the criminal is not taken off the streets and prevented from committing future crimes for a longer time. If she is innocent, she's getting a greater penalty than she deserves. In civil cases, compromise engenders similar injustices; somebody's getting too much or too little or is paying too much or too little. Knowing that compromise is the likely result of any lawsuit sometimes leads the police and prosecutors to "over-charge," i.e., to charge a defendant with crimes greater than they know they can prove so that justice might be done when the case is bargained down and the defendant gets a penalty closer to what she actually deserves. In civil cases, it may also prompt plaintiffs to inflate the damages they ask for in hopes of a settlement that will render them something in the nature of what they feel they deserve.

The United States have been implementing pleas bargaining in the country for several hundreds of years. Plea bargaining expedites the criminal justice system by speeding up the process and reducing costs. Plea bargaining may be unfair to the victims but it is necessary. Without it, our courts would be overrun with cases. Plea bargaining allows the criminal justice system to process cases more efficiently. It is a tool used in the criminal justice system. It provides relief to an already overloaded system. Without the use of plea bargains the criminal justice systems would be at a great disadvantage and the system would be crimpled.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Criminal Justice 694 1 When the judicial system uses the presumed compromise they often engage in the distortion of justice notions in justice systems The notions are usually diluted based on the fact ... View the full answer