See any flaws in this article?

Sentencing Shift Gives New Leverage to Prosecutors.

A ridiculous article that confuses mandatory minimums with the inherent risk/reward that is built into the plea bargaining system.

You know they conveniently left out the fact that the defendant could plea open to the judge or jury.

No such thing as a trial penalty. There is a discount for pleading guilty, however. To me, that is a BIG difference.

Yes, the article stands the notion of a plea bargain on its head.

A plea bargain is a better deal for the defendant, punishment-wise. The state benefits from a certain verdict and avoidance of the expense of a trial. So, the reality is that the majority of defendants get a punishment far less than they deserve if the law were enforced as written. It takes a twisted reporting mind to turn that into an excessive punishment on those defendants who choose a trial.

From the article:

quote:

---

The overloaded court system has also seen comparatively little expansion in many places, making a huge increase in plea bargains a cheap and easy way to handle a near-tripling in felony cases over the past generation.

---

I have always thought the biggest impediment to a jury trial was the lack of opportunity--there are too few courtrooms, judges, and lawyers to actually hold the trials in a timely fashion.