The History of Plea Bargaining and its Controversial Issues

The History of Plea Bargaining
Name
Institution
Due Date
The History of Plea Bargaining
In 1948, the world ushered in a new era with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In this document, the world outlined the human rights that are guaranteed for every person. Among the rights that were outlined included the right to a fair hearing, which meant that a person who has been accused of a crime has a right to be heard. This particular right led to the introduction of a popular phrase that has become quite a cliché within the confines of the courts worldwide; “innocent until proven guilty.” A fair hearing means that the accused is given ample time and participation in a case to present ample evidence of their innocence. Further, the prosecution is given ample time to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is indeed guilty of whichever crime they stand accused of. However, as Kisekka (2020) indicates, the right to a fair hearing also includes other aspects or elements that dictate procession. For example, an accused possesses the right to a speedy trial as well as the right to be tried by an independent tribunal. Further, within the umbrella term of fair hearing, the element of plea bargaining was introduced, albeit attracting controversy over the years. Provided herein is a discussion of the intricacies of plea bargaining. This paper will offer a definition of plea bargaining, provide a history of how plea bargaining started, and also outline some of the controversial issues that are associated with plea bargaining.
Definition
From the term itself, one gathers that plea bargaining entails some form of negotiation. As indicated earlier, an accused has the right to a fair trial. However, through plea bargaining, one can subvert due process and acquire a deal that will enable them not to exercise their right to trial by an impartial jury. According to Langbein (1979), plea bargaining “is a nontribal mode of procedure” where an accused agrees to plead guilty and, in return, gets a more favorable outcome. Some of the benefits that the accused stands to accrue could include a reduced sentence, the prosecution agreeing to drop some charges leveled against the accused, and an accused being charged with a lesser crime. The examples above mainly offer the types of ways in which an accused could make use of the plea bargaining deal.
History of Plea Bargaining
The history of plea bargaining has been marred by a lot of theories. Different scholars have tabled their respective beliefs as to why plea bargaining gained prominence and became “the criminal justice system,” accounting for about 95% of “criminal convictions” (Ortman, 2020). Some scholars believe that plea bargaining became popular because of a rise in caseloads. This theory posits that with the number of court cases rising and the judiciary becoming overwhelmed, it became increasingly crucial to consider a different approach. Plea bargaining gained favor since it helped lessen pressure on courts by speeding the trial process. Another theory that has been tabled to help explain how plea bargaining became popular entails the increased complexity of the trial process. According to Ortman (2020), the trial process in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was quite fast and efficient, unlike today’s process. However, the efficiency of the process was not an indication of the processes’ design or diligence but a representation of its shallowness. Therefore, as the trial process became increasingly complex and other elements were introduced, plea bargaining became increasingly acceptable and appealing within the courts. As Ortman (2020) indicates, plea bargaining became a substitute “for a trial procedure that had crumbled under its own weight.”
Even though the history of plea bargaining cannot be traced along a straight line, Gupta and Chauhan (2019) indicate that as far back as the 17th century, the U.S. had started to experiment with versions of plea bargaining. The researchers note that during the Salem Witchcraft Trials, the witches were asked to confess to avoid death. Additionally, the witches were asked to testify against other witches and help to unearth more witches in Salem. For this particular case, the punishment for witchcraft was death, but the accused were promised to have their lives spared if they pleaded guilty. This was a representation of plea bargaining and how in its different forms, it was still being used as far back as the 17th century. However, plea bargaining was not as popular even with its promise of fewer sentences or less punishment. Judges in the U.S. were discouraging plea bargaining, and judges were often left shocked when an accused would plead guilty (Gupta & Chauhan, 2019). Alschuler (1979) echoes similar sentiments noting that “for many centuries Anglo-American courts did not encourage guilty pleas but actively discouraged them.” In the 19th century, the U.S. courts were still pessimistic about plea bargaining, but as Alschuler (1979) indicates, plea bargaining gained prominence in the second half of the 19th century as it became a more viable option. In Boston, for example, plea barga...