[lbo-talk] From under the Iron heel . . .

[Luke Weiger]

Why shouldn't an admittance of guilt decrease one's penalty?  It shows
contrition and more importantly saves the state (that is, the people) a
bundle of resources--which, if you didn't know, will always be finite.
Perhaps it would be best to put murderers X, Y, and Z away for 25 years, but
if offering them 20 year sentences will allow us to put more money into
higher education (or any number of other worthy ends) we need to take that
into account.

-- Luke

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bartlett" <billbartlett at dodo.com.au>
To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] From under the Iron heel . . .


> The fundamental problem is sytematic. The prosecutor's job should not
> be to determine penalties, yet perversions of the criminal law such
> as plea bargaining and mandatory sentencing have just that effect.
>
> The US system is especially repulsive due to the fact that the
> professional ethics of prosecutors seem to allow them to charge
> people with crimes more serious than they actually believe they are
> guilty of, as a form of leverage to coerce guilty pleas to less
> serious charges.
>
> This is a monstrous practice, but the root of the problem lies in
> permitting prosecutors to have any say in sentencing, through secret
> back-room deals. Just on principle, it is taking the adversarial
> legal system too far when the two can haggle over choice of crime and
> sentencing. This is, to my mind, corrupt. No doubt it also has the
> effect of many crimes going unpunished, as well as many innocent
> people being coerced to plead guilty, depending on the amount of
> "justice" an accused person can afford.
>
> >  She handles way too many cases to give everyone a really fair shake
> >however, a problem she readily concedes but has no practical
> >solution for. Prosecutors it would seem are also given pretty skimpy
> >resources in order to bring about the same effect as skimping on
> >funds for the PD's office. Process poor people quickly through the
> >system before anyone really has a chance to find out much about the
> >case.
>
> Yes, obviously a large part of the problem is that governments are
> trying to do justice on the cheap. But, as Doug said on another
> issue, you only get what you pay for and justice costs more than what
> Americans are prepared to pay apparently. That's a problem everywhere
> actually, but especially chronic in the US.
>
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tas
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>