Ethical Dilemmas in Plea Bargaining
The purpose of this assignment is to use critical thinking skills to apply course concepts to hypothetical scenarios to assess ethical considerations. The assignment takes a look at ethical dilemmas in plea bargaining. Assess the following differences between moral judgements and moral rules before you evaluate the assignment:
Moral Judgment: You should do what your professional opinion dictates.
Moral rules:
One should do one’s duty.
One should serve the public good.
One should strive for justice.
One should not waste resources.
The moral rules are consistent with both ethical formalism and with utilitarianism. The reason why the judgment is correct differs between them, however. Under ethical formalism, one should do one’s duty. As a prosecutor, one serves justice and the community–and the victims are part of the community–but the prosecutor is not an advocate for the victims per se. Utilitarianism would be more concerned with the waste of resources; it is not good for society to utilize too much prosecutorial time, or prison beds, on offenders who could be deterred through probation.
Complete the following steps:
Choose to write about one of the following scenarios:
1. You are a district attorney prosecuting a burglary case. The defendant is willing to plead guilty in return for a sentence of probation, and you believe that this is a fair punishment because your evidence may not support a conviction. However, the victims are upset and want to see the offender receive prison time. They insist that you try the case. What should you do?
2. You ride a motorcycle, and you think it is much more enjoyable to ride without a helmet. You also believe that your vision and hearing are better without a helmet. Your state has just passed a helmet law, and you have already received two warnings. What should you do? What if your child was riding on the motorcycle with you?
3. You are a prosecutor in a large district. You have received a case involving a crime against a child where the child victim is 10 years old. You have a strong case against the suspect and expect to win at trial. The penalty for the crimes carry 20 years to life for the perpetrator should the jury find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The parents have expressed they want the maximum penalty. Testifying will be detrimental to the 10 year old but the child wants to testify and the parents have agreed.
A therapist has assured you the child is strong enough to tell the story on the stand but is concerned about long term effects. You have 5 other high profile cases and 20 other felonies backlogged. The District Attorney has been encouraging the ADAs to plea bargain as much as possible to keep costs down because the budget is being crunched for the high profile trials. The defense has signaled they want to confer about a plea bargain of 15 years with 5 years suspended. What should you do?
Write a 2-3 page paper on the scenario of your choice. Be sure to evaluate pros and cons of your decision(s). Use support to back up your points.
