I think that we have to be very careful before we go too far down the road of copying the US in the widespread use of plea bargaining (see [2008] Gazette, 7 February, 12).


This is how the Joint Legislative Committee on Crime in New York described plea bargaining: 'The final climactic act in the plea-bargaining procedure is a charade which in itself has aspects of dishonesty which rival the original crime in many instances. The accused is made to assert publicly his guilt on a specific crime, which in many cases he has not committed; in some cases he pleads guilty to a non-existing crime. He must further indicate that he is entering his plea freely... and that he is not doing so because of any promises made to him.



'In plea bargaining the accused pleads guilty, whether he is or not, and saves the state the trouble of a trial in return for the promise of a less severe punishment.'



It rather seems to me from that description that plea bargaining, certainly as practised in the US, may save public money, but at the expense of justice. Is that something that English lawyers should be supporting?



Martin Ross, Brighton