plea bargaining ought to be abolished in the United States criminal justice system.

If my opponent was paying attention, i very clearly stated in my observation and my first point that, and I quote "incarcerated because of pressure to take plea deals." I never once said that it was a responsibility to not take a plea deal, but purely that plea deals are being forced upon men and women who are under trial and are led to believe this is their only option. I will re-reference a piece of evidence I used in my case. Lynch, Timothy 2008; Cato Institute; "Plea Bargains Jeopardize Justice" Plea bargaining unquestionably alleviates the workload of judges, prosecutors, and defense lawyers. There is no doubt that government officials deliberately use their power to pressure people who have been accused of crime, and who are presumed innocent, to confess their guilt and waive their right to a formal trial. We know this to be true because prosecutors freely admit that this is what they do.... Again, what this is saying is that people of authority are trying to convince INNOCENT men and women that they need to take a plea bargain. Solely for the purpose of either making their job easier or "alleviating the courtroom workload." Langbein, John H. Yale Law School 1979 "Our criminal justice system has become ever more dependent on processing cases of serious crime through the non-trial procedure of plea bargaining. Unable to adjudicate, we now engage in condemnation without adjudication. Be- cause our constitutions guarantee adjudication, we threaten the criminal defendant with a markedly greater sanction if he insists on adjudication and is convicted. This sentencing differential, directed towards inducing the defendant to waive his right to trial, makes plea bargaining work." This goes against my opponents value. Proving that with the current plea bargain system, both my value of justice and theirs of liberty are not being upheld. How can liberty be upheld when people are being pressured into giving up their right? And to combat what my opponent said about the backlog in court cases, our system is corrupt. I can fully support that we do have a surge of court cases and that it is definitely difficult to try them all. But going back to my value, we cannot sacrifice quality for quantity. Instead of convicting innocent men and women in an attempt to solve this, why not go to the root of the problem? Instead of focusing solely on the trial process, why not work on creating a society in which less people are commiting crimes? And in order to rebuild my case after my opponents attack on my race point, Racial disparity in the criminal system Caroline Simon ; Reporter; june. 16, 2016, (first name; "There is a stunning gap between the number of white and black inmates in America's prisons ", Business insider; june. 16, 2016) A new study shows a large disparity between imprisonment rates for African-Americans, whites and Hispanics.The study, published by The Sentencing Project, a nonprofit that advocates criminal justice reform, looked at incarceration rates for ethnic groups in every state, using data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics.Here are some of the most striking findings: In state prisons, African-Americans are incarcerated at 5.1 times the rate of whites. Five states " Iowa, Minnesota, New Jersey, Vermont, and Wisconsin " have a disparity of more than 10 to 1. Twelve states have prison populations that were more than half black: Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. Maryland has a prison population that"s 72 percent black. In 11 states, at least 1 in 20 adult African-American men is in prison. In Oklahoma, it"s 1 in 15. Latinos are incarcerated at 1.4 times the rate of whites. Disparities between imprisonment rates for Hispanics and whites are particularly high in Massachusetts (4.3:1), Connecticut (3.9:1), Pennsylvania (3.3:1), and New York (3.1:1) This is proving that there is an obvious gap in the amount of people being convicted depending on their race. Again, in order to solve this problem, let us go to the root of the cause and try to alleviate contention between minorities and police! If we fight to take racism out of enforcing the law then there is no need for anything such as plea bargains that target minorities. Which I have proved with my evidence. RACE Devers; Ph.D., 2011 Lindsey; January 24, 2011; Bureau of Justice Assistance; US Department of Justice The majority of research on race and sentencing outcomes shows that blacks are less likely than whites to receive reduced pleas. Proving that even with plea bargains minorities are still getting targeted. Which again goes against my value of justice. Why are we using a system that is unjust and attacks people purely for being a different color? This goes against everything we believe as a society. I would also like to state that you have no date on your race evidence, so unless you can show a proper citation, your whole point is invalid. To summarize what I have said- I have negated my opponents value of liberty, proving that liberty is not being upheld with plea bargains That innocent men and women are being incarcerated because of laziness My opponent values quantity over quality and wants to get more court cases done quickly than actually convict those in need of convicting. And unlike what my opponent said, i have indeed proven that plea bargains are extremely negative for those of color. Instead of focusing on getting through these trials fast, lets us work on the main problem. Creating a society in which crime is not so rampant so that every can be tried fairly. I"d like to leave you off with an example of someone who actually is affected negatively by plea bargains. Proving that justice is indeed not being upheld. Dervan, Lucian E., Edkins, Vanessa A.; The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology; "THE INNOCENT DEFENDANT'S DILEMMA: AN INNOVATIVE EMPIRICAL STUDY OF PLEA BARGAINING'S INNOCENCE PROBLEM"; Dervan"s Qualifications: Visiting Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Georgia School of Law and Assistant Professor of Law at the Southern Illinois University School of Law. Former member of the King & Spalding LLP Special Matters and Government Investigations practice group. Edkin"s Qualifications: Ph.D., Florida Institute of Technology, Department of Psychology; 2013 In Beatrice, Nebraska, the choice for Taylor was difficult, but the incentives to admit guilt were enticing.^ A sentence of ten to forty years in prison meant she would return home one day and salvage at least a portion of her life.' The alternative, a lifetime behind bars, was grim by comparison.^" After contemplating the options, Taylor pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting second-degree murder." Just as Taylor had decided to control her destiny and accept the certainty of the lighter alternative,she was innocent of the offenses of which she had been accused.'^ After serving nineteen years in prison, Taylor was exonerated after DNA testing proved that neither she nor any of the other five defendants in her case were involved in the murder.'*