Resolved: In the United States, plea bargaining in exchange for testimony is unjust

Value: Justice Value Criteria: Societal Welfare 1. Justice is that which allows people their due process 2. Justice is that which protects society Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony fails to protect society o Certain crimes are to receive certain punishments and when those requirements are not met, someone could wind up getting hurt; in the sense that prison time teaches you a lesson, and with not enough prison time, you do not learn your lesson. o Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony presents criminals with the mindset that if they commit more crimes their sentence can be commuted by ratting out their friends. In addition, it puts more criminals out into society because with shorter prison sentences they get out earlier. This is dangerous, because crime levels could rise to such a place in which it occurs at an uncontrollable rate. o In addition, the innocent are put at greater risk by plea bargaining because innocent individuals may plead guilty out of pressure and the evidence presented in court. Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony tends to falsely incriminate people. o Many times, if prosecutors think there is one suspect who is more dangerous to society than some of his or her partners in crime, they'll cut a deal with the others. Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony takes away the integrity of the justice system o Our justice system is to be a straight forward, non-biased one. Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony makes it so opposite from that. As they help law, they will let them reap their own benefits. o Plea bargaining is a negotiation of the Double Jeopardy law in the bill of rights. o Not only does plea bargaining open space for wayward decision, but it has a great potential for abuse. A person who plea bargains for his testimony is not a very credible person to testify. If there is corroborating evidence to support the testimony that's one thing, but I'm sure that many a criminal has testified a certain way just to save their own lives. An example of this happening is the 1996 case of Marvin Thomas Nissen. He lied during a plea and put John Lotter on death row. It wasn't until recently that he admitted to lying, and Mr. Lotter was taken off of the death row. It has been confirmed that in the United States, the main reason that plea bargaining takes place is to avoid the uncertainties of a trial. But, do the "uncertainties of a trial" really have to affect justice? There are many other ways for a court to acquire a confession from a criminal than offering to waver their sentence. o There are several of humane interrogation types that agencies such as the FBI use to keep our country safe. o Specialists on body language are able to tell whether or not a person is lying. By using that, they are able to force the true information out of a person Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony might save money, but it is still unjust o Justice should not be affected by things such as money. How does money determine what right from wrong? o As the US is so called saving money, victims are getting the dissatisfaction; as would anybody else whose culprit was not being sentenced as he or she should. In conclusion, the law is not something to sell. Crimes are not something to bargain with. Justice must be served, but it must remain above the fray, above the marketplace. The safety of our children and the integrity of the legal system must remain inviolate. One person is no better than another simply because they roll over for the police. Sources: Duke Law Journal -Yahoo News - Cnn.com