Chapter 4.4

Question 1

plea negotiations

Answer 1

Plea negotiations are pre-trial discussions between the prosecution and the accused to settle a criminal case. The goal is to agree on an outcome without having to go to trial. such as the accused pleading guilty in exchange for certain concessions from the prosecution. For example, the accused might plead guilty to fewer or less serious charges if the prosecution drops other charges. This can lead to lighter penalties and a sentence discount, providing a double incentive to plead guilty. Plea negotiations are often encouraged because they help resolve cases efficiently without going to trial.

Question 2

purpose of plea negotions

Answer 2

• it streamlines the flow of cases by producing guilty pleas and securing convictions thus saving court time, taxpayer money, less expensive
• victims of crime and other witnesses are also saved the truama and burden of giving evidence at trial
• it can provide an accused with greater certainty as to the outcome of their cases because they can control the facts that they will be sentenced on
• convictions are secured in cases where the prosecution may have doubts about their ability to prove a higher charge at a trial due to issues with witnesses
• it may be possible to negotiate a charge that will be dealt with by the magistrates court rather then the higher and more formal courts saving time and money

Question 3

appropriatness of plea negotion

Answer 3

• whether the accused is willing to cooperate in the investigation or prosecution of co-offenders, or
  offenders of other crimes
• the strength of the evidence, including the strength of the prosecution’s case and of any defences
• whether the accused is ready and willing to plead guilty
• whether the accused is represented. The prosecution may be less willing to negotiate with a
  self-represented party (accused person) who may not understand the processes
• whether the witnesses are reluctant or unable to give evidence, which would jeopardise the
  prosecution’s ability to achieve a guilty verdict
• the possible adverse (negative) consequences of a full trial, including the stress and inconvenience
  on victims and witnesses giving evidence
• the time and expense involved in a trial, particularly the costs associated with running the case
• the views of the victim (the prosecutor should consult the victims and take their views into
  account when considering plea negotiations).

Question 4

guilty plea

Answer 4

when an offender
formally admits
guilt, which is then
considered by the court
when sentencing

Question 5

self-represented party

Answer 5

a person before a
court or tribunal who
has not engaged (and
is not represented
by) a lawyer or other
professional

Question 6

strengths of plea negotions

Answer 6

• Negotiations help determine criminal cases. This is because they avoid a full hearing or trial, and
  the matter can proceed to sentencing.
• Victims, witnesses and their families, and the accused’s family are saved the trauma,
  inconvenience and distress of the trial process.
• The prosecutor will consult with victims and may take their views into consideration when deciding whether to negotiate with an
  accused.
• Plea negotiations save the cost of a full trial or hearing and saves resources
• Plea negotiations help to make sure there is
  certainty of outcome for the parties.

Question 7

weakness of plea negotion

Answer 7

• Privacy: Plea negotiations are private, which can lead to concerns about the fairness of the process and the reasons behind the prosecution’s decision.
• Avoiding Proof: Some see negotiations as avoiding the need for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, which is a fundamental justice principle.
• Victims’ Input: Victims do not have the final say in whether a plea deal is reached; their views are not decisive.
• Self-Representation: A self-represented accused may feel pressured to accept a plea deal even if the evidence is weak, though safeguards are in place.
• Delays: Failure to engage in negotiations early can lead to increased costs and wasted resources on a case that could have been resolved sooner.