- October 7, 2021
- Posted by: Nicholas Fitch
In the case of hybrid offences committed in England and Wales, the decision of a case before the Magistrate`s Court or the Court of Justice will only be taken by the judges after presenting a plea. An accused is therefore unable to plead guilty in exchange for a case before the Magistrate`s Court (which has lesser powers of trial). Another argument against Plea Bargaining is that it may not really reduce the costs of administering justice. For example, if a prosecutor has only a 25% chance of winning his case and sending an accused to prison for 10 years, he can enter into a plea agreement for a one-year sentence; But if pleadings are not available, a prosecutor can drop the case altogether.  For example, if the defense has an extremely strong case that is likely to win at trial, it may be best to reject a plea and have the case play in a jury trial. Experienced federal prosecutors know how to negotiate with federal prosecutors and understand how and when they should object to how the probation officer calculated the criminal guidelines. You also know how to prepare an effective sentencing memorandum to convince the federal judge to impose a sentence lower than what is stated in the guidelines. In 2009, the Danish Supreme Court (Danish: Højesteret) unanimously ruled that prima facie pleadings were not legal under Danish law, but that witnesses had to testify independently of this case (with the caveant, that the first instance consider the possibility that the testimony would consider the possibility that the testimony was not legal under Danish law. or at least influenced by the benefits of oral argument).  However, the Supreme Court has indicated that Danish legislation contains mechanisms similar to those of Plea Bargains, such as Article 82, No. 10 of the Danish Criminal Code (Danish: pénalfloven) which provides that a sentence may be reimbursed if the offender provides information to elucidate an offence committed by others, or § 23(a) of the Danish Competition Act (in Danish: competitionloven), which stipulates that someone can ask not to be prosecuted with a fine or sanction for participating in a cartel, if he provides information about the cartel that is provided to the authorities in time.   Prosecutors should never lay more charges than necessary, just to encourage an accused to plead guilty to a few.
In the same way, they should never pursue a more serious charge just to encourage an accused to plead guilty to a less serious charge.  The general duty of the prosecutor is. to see that justice is done. Procedures must create public and judicial confidence. Many defendants in serious and complex fraud cases are represented by lawyers experienced in commercial litigation, including negotiations. This means that the defendant is usually protected from inappropriate pressure to plead. The main danger to be protected in these cases is that the prosecutor is persuaded to accept a plea or basis that is not in the public interest and in the interest of justice because it does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offence. Any plea agreement must reflect the gravity and magnitude of the offence and give the court appropriate sanctioning powers. It must take into account the impact of an agreement on the victims and also on the general public, while respecting the rights of the accused.  For example, Robert Badinter argued that oral hearings would give too much power to the prosecutor and encourage defendants to accept a fair sentence to avoid the risk of a heavier sentence in a trial, even if they didn`t really deserve it. .