Posted on 03/14/2006 1:05:07 PM PST by Former Military Chick
He deserves our sympathy -- he just lost his mother.
{/lame joke}
I doubt the killer has enough money for lawyers that are good enough to pull the insanity defense successfully. A competent lawyer could, without that much trouble, prove an insanity defense, however if this kid is going with a ‘public defendant’ (aka court-appointed defendants) then that will not be the case. The judge made the right decision, and one that I highly doubt will backfire.
There is still some risk though …..after all there are some public defendants who are actually quite capable, however I doubt the risk is that much. With that said there is a big reason why 90% of all convictions in the US stem from plea bargains. With a plea bargain (almost) everyone is happy:
- Court-appointed defendants are only paid for the first 15-20 hours worth of work, thus they have little incentive to prolong a case.
- Prosecutors hate to lose cases, thus a plea bargain is like an instant feather in their cap.
- It saves the local government money. Let me illustrate this with an example given by Dirk Olin (national editor of ‘The American Lawyer’): There are 100 cases a year; the D.A. has a budget of $100,000. With only $1,000 to spend investigating and prosecuting each case, half the defendants will be acquitted. But if the D.A. can get 90 defendants to cop pleas, he can concentrate his resources on the 10 who refuse, spend $10,000 on each case and get a conviction rate of 90 percent.
The only issue is the defendant. It could even be argued that most defendants should say no to plea bargains, but the vast majority of people who accept them do not know better (and they are told by their court-appointed defendants, and most who accept them are people who cannot afford true legal representation, that they should opt for them). Thus when told that by pleading guilt they will get a lighter sentence, and that if they go for a full trial they will lose and get the full letter of the law (and especially when it is their court-appointed lawyer telling them this), most people will opt for a plea.
Someone with money to fight a case should simply not go that route (at least in most cases). On the other hand, an ax-murderer who is on tap for the electric chair due to a first-degree murder rap, and who is either facing solid evidence against him or a weak defence (read: court-appointed defendant), would be better off copping a plea since then the first-degree charge (with ol’ sparky looming on the horizon) would be dropped for the lesser second-degree murder charge.
On the other hand even ‘solid evidence’ is not that solid when one has enough money to get good legal representation. Think about people like OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson, and Robert Blake. All 3 cases would have convicted ‘normal’ (read: average discretionary income) people, and done so easily, but add lawyers that can milk a snake and suddenly all 3 men are scott free.
Anyways, I don’t think the judge made a mistake here. This kid is going down, and going down hard!
BTTT
My mom was friends with Diane. She would always look forward to the lunches they had each month. Loosing a friend is always hard, but they way it happened in this case - you can't imagine the shock, confusion and sicking feelings. The judge did the right thing.
Another "what happened to dad" story.
Ok, one reasonable judge out of how many?
Take the rest out and stone them.
I've heard it said that the entire court system in the country would shut down if everyone with a traffic ticket pled not guilty. The courts couldn't handle them and almost all would have to be thrown out.
They seldom do.
I appreciate that clarification. I do not know the judge but I thought it was applaudable that he say no to the plea deal.
It seems that perhaps that he would rather the jury decide on such a sentence as he would have to return one day to their community.
looks like there is no shortage of money here, just a waste of it....
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/042705/loc_20050427004.shtml
It makes sense if we knew the time off for good behavior calculation.
It's just me but, I think the insanity defense will fly.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Many Freepers are loathe to admit that they want activist judges as long as they think like they do. Good post.
That will never happen though (unless the perps study game theory, and then decide AS A WHOLE to refuse plea bargains).
My prayers out to the family and your mom.. my mother also lost a friend to a violent murder.. death is hard enough without these kinds of things.
And how would that be bad thing... A 'plea deal' is basically 'a confession under duress for the promise of a lighter sentence'. The founding fathers of this country would be disgusted by the practice of 'plea deals'.
It only took Lizzie Borden 40 whacks with an axe. More evidence of the dumbing down of society.
Most likely supply and demand would kick in. The punishments for a plea bargain would drop and the ones for taking it to trial would rise until enough took the plea bargains.
If you are caught in possession of drugs, would you take a fine and a couple weeks in jail, or risk having the prosecutor claim that you were a distrubutor and chance a life sentence?
Another think I'm surprised about is that more people arrested don't assert their right for a speedy trial. "OK, if you have the evidence to arrest me, try me next week. If you can't do that, then drop the charge and release me until you can get a trial date."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.