Skip to main content

"Rough justice" from plea bargaining called intolerable

"For pity is the virtue of the law,
And none but tyrants use it cruelly."
- Wm Shakespeare in "Timon of Athens"

This from the recent book Ordinary Injustice: How America Holds Court by Amy Bach:
… plea bargaining is the main vehicle for facilitating substantive justice.  Plea bargaining is justified on grounds of expediency.  It also tends to make judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys look good.  Unlike a trial, pleas, by and large, cannot be appealed: the defendant has in effect bargained away his rights.  Pleas also keep the conviction rates high because a prosecutor doesn't run the risk of losing in a trial.  And it keeps a defense attorney's workload manageable.

Ordinary Injustice: How America Holds CourtAlbert W. Alschuler[, a professor at Northwestern University School of Law,] has made a comprehensive study of the problem of plea bargaining and coercion. "Once you get used to it," he said, "you don't even notice the injustice."  The cost is a metamorphosis of the system, in which power comes to reside in the one person who has the authority to approve a plea.  "I think you ought to use the word fascism," he said when asked about the conditions in American courts.  "Most people don't understand what rights and procedures are for.  They look to the bottom line: did we do rough justice in most cases?"  They don't realize that "the answer is usually going to be yes.  If you asked about justice in the former Soviet Union or the People's Republic of China or Saddam Hussein's Iraq the answer would also be yes.  If you make me a czar and you say I can do whatever I want … well, I am going to do rough justice in most cases.  But that is intolerable."  According to Alschuler, one solution is to get rid of plea bargaining altogether.  In its place, the system should reduce the "over-proceduralization" of full-blown jury trials with simpler trials which may, for example, be conducted by a judge alone.

Another leading scholar, John H. Langbein, a professor at Yale Law School, has decried plea bargaining as a form of a tortured, forced confession.  In an interview, Langbein argued that adversarial criminal procedure is unworkable as a system of mass justice.  In practice it comes down to "coercion," he said.  "And it is truth disserving."
Those who are especially apt to lose out on justice because of plea bargaining are indigent homeless folk, and especially so in hard economic times.

The system, including attorneys on both sides and the judges, will press for a deal to be struck, to forgo any long procedure and expensive trial process. The defendent is caught in the crosshairs, with everyone urging that he accept any proffered deal. Damn a real, honest effort at justice, full speed ahead!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Mission Five Years Ago, And Today

I have spent the night the past two weeks plus at the Union Gospel Mission and am having an excellent time of it -- not only regards to sleeping in the dorm that the mission has, but also listening to the sermons that are delivered in the early evening. The Christmas music that is performed is also splendid. [And the food -- the FOOD -- has been fantastic during my stay so far! A happier Tom there couldn't be.] I chatted with a pal last night about The Mish – about how things were about five years ago when we both used the mission’s services frequently, and how thing are, today.
Five years ago, there were a lot scuffles between the guys when the front gate was opened in the early afternoon and in the area near the contact window there were some brawls as guys fought over where guys were in line to get a bed in the dorm.
Nowadays, however, the mission is very much a peaceful place both on the grounds of the facility and and out on the street.
I do not know what transformative eve…

Homeless Sacramentans lose case that would have given them the right to set up outdoor camping

8/11/13 I certainly give attorneys Mark Merin and Cat Williams credit for pursuing a case against the city of Sacramento to give homeless Sacramentans the right to set up tents and a campsite. I wanted them to win their case, but they didn't. They lost it.

BUT, it is also necessary to look at the particulars of the case that Merin and Williams brought and see that the situation underlying the court case was not very compelling.

During the period eight years ago when 22 homeless campers set up their tents and brought in supplies to Mark Merin's vacant lot at C Street, near 12th, there was loud noise and plenty of other mayhem. Drug dealers were on the street encouraging buys from the campers. The Hernandez couple that lived in a house nearby were constantly being taunted by the campers, disrupting their lives.

Per always with Safe Ground camps, calm was deserted for the sake of boisterousness.

Leader John Kraintz and the other Safe Grounders would claim to have signed strict a…

After a Three-Month Hiatus, a Fall from a Ladder & a Broken Wrist, Evangelist Jimmy Roughton Returns to Union Gospel Mission to Preach

After being away from Union Gospel Mission for a quarter of a year, Jimmy Roughton returned to preach at UGM on the cold night of December 13 -- despite suffering [a little? a lot? dunno.] from a fall from a ladder that likely immediately preceded a significant injury (a wrist that was broken).


It was good to see his group from Capital Free Will Baptist Church up on the pulpit, with Roughton rough-and-ready to seduce and inspire the happily-captivate crowd at UGM.


Roughton told us in his opening words that he was now in his 27th year coming to the mission.

I recall the first preaching I had heard from Roughton on June 13, 2009. At that time and up to the current time, Roughton is the only preacher I had ever heard evoke Pascal's Wager -- which is something he would do, occasionally thereafter at the mission. He would evoke Pascal's wager, yet again, last night [12/13/17].


Pascal's wager

Last night, Jimmy evoked Pascal's Wager. He did so near the end of his talk, citing …