According to the American Bar Association, many criminal cases are resolved out of court by having both sides come to an agreement or by negotiating a plea bargain. The association further explains the agreement is prevalent for practical reasons. Noting defendants can avoid time and costs of defending themselves at trial, the risk of harsh punishment and publicity of a trial…the prosecution on the other hand saves time and the expense of a lengthy trial. 

According to an article on npr.org, “The vast majority of criminal cases end in plea bargains, a new report finds,” published February 2023, 98% of criminal cases in the federal courts are settled with a plea agreement.

“While there are no exact estimates of the proportion of cases that are resolved through plea bargaining, scholars estimate that about 90 to 95 percent of both federal and state court cases are resolved through this process (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005; Flanagan and Maguire,1990),” the Bureau of Justice reported in a research summary.

Plea bargaining is defined as the exchange of official concessions for a defendant’s act of self-conviction. 

Maybe this is where our criminal justice system needs reformed. 

It seems more sensible we offer plea agreements when our case hits the wall but it has become apparent, we offer deals regardless of the hand of cards we hold.  

Just recently, I wrote the article on Dakota Redich, a 21-year-old registered sex offender who vacated the conditions of his bond resulting in a bench warrant being issued for his arrest. 

The affidavit of probable cause was solid. It clearly outlined two separate times Redich had failed to register his address with the sheriff’s office. The documentation was spot on, clear and apparent. With the two occasions where Redich lied to authorities the court documentation charged Redich with two counts of failure to register as a sex offender. However, after the paper trail and a change of plea hearing, Redich pled guilty to one charge of failure to register as a sex offender. 

One count dropped. 

Johnathon Cervantes’ case was a slam dunk too. Illegal immigrant high on drugs and drunk as a skunk, slams into two innocent motorcycle riders returning from Sturgis stringing the human casualties down our state highway. 

One count dropped. 

One count dropped.

Redich was a registered sex offender. I have been unable to research his initial crime however, nonetheless he is a registered sex offender. He was convicted by a jury of his peers of a sex crime. It’s more likely he entered a guilty plea for whatever his initial charges were and the statistics above tell you chances are, Redich received a plea deal for his initial crime. His sex crime required him to register as an offender for one or many reasons. He failed to register. Showed up at the detention center, provided them a false address and failed to provide authorities with his actual address, required by law. 

Why on earth did he have bond anyway? He already showed the community he is a danger to society and he has no respect for the authorities of the law…. let’s let him out on bond, pending a presentencing investigation for a failure to respect the courts orders.

Are we really doing any justice when we offer a plea agreement? Sure, we are saving time. Saving money. But at whose expense? 

If the offender is going to go out and commit another crime, which is clear in most of these types of cases, why are we giving them an opportunity to avoid the publicity of a trial? Why are we worried about them saving money defending themselves? 

It seems to me, plea deals, bargains and agreements are just too frequent and unwarranted. Why should an offender have the right to “bargain” their way out of a crime? 

The justice system is similar to shopping at a thrift store – giving criminals the opportunity to negotiate the best terms. 

The last I knew, the victims of these crimes never had the opportunity to negotiate the terms and conditions of the criminal offenses committed against them.

And thank you, Frank, for the great read.