The Iraq Incident

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Lets Wrap it up: We have to go against it.

Arguments have been made for and against plea bargains, commonly called plea deals, but when everything comes together we're going to have to go against it. As stated plea deals harm minorities and poor people more than any other socioeconomic class in the US. Douglas Savitsky points out that good defendants are more likely to avoid bad cases, which almost a majority of the time consist of someone from a lower socioeconomic class, and what plea deals do to justice, in this instant, is they undermine it. When someone is given a deal, it usually is less than the original deal, the problem is that justice isn't being served. If all persons were given good defendants who actually cared justice would be served, but plea deals avoid this process altogether and force people, whether innocent or not, into a prison situation. Plea deals are the greatest threat to justice that there is. Also, keep in mind that plea deals have not provided justice especially in the Iraq incident, were a commander of a squad allowed for his squad to kill innocent civilians. Ever normal person would agree that a punishment equal to the crime should be distributed. This was not the case and the world was shocked that this soldier was allowed to not have a punishment equal to his crime. But we have to keep in mind some of the arguments that plea deals are good.
When looking at some of the points that plea deals are good we start of at the deterring more than jail time argument. But this holds no weight if we want real justice, allowing someone to avoid a sentence it reifies the faults in the system. While its heartbreaking that families are torn apart the root of the problem lies in the upbringing of the child and that affects the way someone acts in society. The main problem withe increasing crime rates is poverty, we should solve that before even addressing plea deals. But we also have to look the compelling argument that we can information from terrorist by using plea deals. When looking at Nicoles comment that, "The help of captured terrorists does help our country through plea bargaining, but what if the information they give us is false? Are there repercussions for the terrorists who've led our men into an attack? " I agree with her and ask all of you to question this point as well and as Sloan redefined, " On one hand plea bargains are a very useful tool for the U.S. in these types of situations, but as Nicole said what happens if the information given is false? I feel as though this tactic is faulty in some aspects." That really brings this point down, but also what Morgan said truly threw this point away, "You would think that there would be more than the ones you caught and you would also not know what they were specifically going after. This might help us from something getting destroyed that day but, how do you know whats going to happen the next." You as the commentors have taken down this point that I think we can all safely say plea deals are bad. 

Plea Bargains: Against

Additionally, both because plea bargaining makes the prosecution of poor and minority defendants less expensive than the prosecution of wealthy and white defendants, and because differential subjective evaluation of the criminal justice system by minority defendants as compared to similarly situated white defendants tends to be more pessimistic, Black defendants fare worse in the plea bargaining system than do white defendants, which drives up prison differentials. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to link the extensive literatures on prison population and stratification with the literature on plea bargaining to provide a sociological model of plea bargaining. 

Douglas Savistsky J.D., Ph.D., 2009/2010, “Is Plea Bargaining a Rational Choice? Plea Bargaining as an Engine of Racial Stratification and Overcrowding in the United States Prison System” 

What Douglas Savistsky understands about the legal System in the United States is that prosecutors are inclined to be pick up because poor and minority defendants are cheaper and easier cases to prosecute, thus prosecutors are  more likely to pursue these kinds of cases The prosecution of white rich defendants are hardly attacked aggressively because of the amount of wealth that certain demographics have over one another. Thus begins the cycle of racism where poor and minority people are given bad defendants because their cases are viewed as a trap for good defendants so the poor are assigned bad defense lawyers and then a good or bad prosecutor is going to rip apart the defendants case, plea bargains are only a reinforcing of the lack of actual court representation that poor and minorities get. Plea bargains are the worst possible thing for the reputation of the justice system.  

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Pro: Plea Bargain

According to Ken Gude in his January 2010 article on the American Progress Website points out some interesting points regarding Plea Bargains. What he points out is that plea bargains have been used to help the US get information on terrorist activity. What is more interesting is that, most terrorists are likely to give  information away to the US in exchange for information regarding other terrorist organizations. One specific example he shows is the drone strike that led to the killing of an Al- Qaeda leader. Plea Bargains have not only been instrumental with regards to domestic issues, but also in foreign affairs as well.
  Ken Gude, January 2010, Criminal Courts Are Tougher on Terrorists than Military                                                Detention

When analyzing things in the American System, specifically the justice system, most people automatically think that it could have no impact foreign issues. But at the point in which the US is gaining more information from terrorists with the use of Plea Bargains compared to the success rate of Military Detention Centers (ex: Guantanamo Bay) it becomes imperative that the US continue the policy of using Plea Bargains to help protect US citizens. While most people would not want terrorists to have shorter sentences, they are overlooking the sentence length, but most importantly that these terrorists would never give information that saves American lives, had it not been for Plea Bargains. We must continue the policy of allowing terrorists to redeem themselves so that the US can expand its intelligence and continue its promise to protect its citizens.

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Plea Bargain: Against

In a January 26th issue of the Washington Post, It brings to light some of the issues that plea bargaining has. The Article titled, Iraq will take legal action to ensure justice for civilians killed in US raid, official says, talks mainly about the killing of 24 civilians in a United States Marine Corps raid. While, yes, there is collateral damage in war, this Marine squad was on a killing spree but the leader is no longer going to be even jail time for this atrocity. What this shows about plea bargains is, first that they don't provide justice. Second that people view them as an easy way out, and lastly that people are becoming less afraid of committing theses crimes as seen in the Iraq slaughter. 


                         Associated Press, Published: January            26

My main issue withe plea bargaining, in view of recent events, is that people are not being punished for their actions. 24 people were killed!!! In the US we call that manslaughter, but what is not being emphasized is that the squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, is no longer going to be receiving jail time for allowing his troops to kill innocent civilians. Even the government of Iraq was outraged when they heard the news, and now want to prosecute the squad in Iraq. If a US implemented policy regarding legal action of a mass murder results in a plea deal of now jail time justice is being violated. We cant allow that happen as leaders in the world of justice, and this is a major flaw in the US legal system and should be abolished. 

Monday, January 23, 2012

Plea Bargains


In the article, titled Murder Sentences Not Much of A Deterrent, it analyzes the impact of jail sentences compared to plea deals. One of the key things about this article is that we have to keep in mind, hardly any plea deal results in the death sentence. With that in mind, this article points out that lesser sentences are more of a deterrent that harsher sentences. Paul T. Rosynsky also points out that the United States has the most severe punishment rates in the entire world and not surprisingly one of the highest crime rates. But the article continues in providing a solution. It says that, the solution is that long term incarceration is better for the prisoners. Most importantly this article discusses some of the key issues about the American society which is that most motives for murder have become trivial like wearing the wrong color. 


Paul T. Rosynsky, 10/14/2009 Murder sentences not much of a deterrent

I think that with the use of plea bargains in the US right now, a lot of problems are being solved. When looking at the criminal justice system most cases are tried by using plea deals, and this has really helped a majority of the population to what it means to be incarcerated, but to provide them with an outlet. Plea deals offer a criminal a chance. Instead of steaming in a jail cell, plea deals give criminals a second chance at life that they appreciate and use to the fullest. Making someone serve a full sentence only makes them more resentful towards people and in some instances that can increase crime rate. Plea deals offer not only a new hope to those convicted but the family of the convicted. A father, or mother went missing and children are left alone. Plea deals help heal the wounds by not only making the person realize that what they did was wrong, but by restore families.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

The Real Question

Should plea bargains be used in the Justice System or are they a threat to the Legal System?