31.738
Bearbeitungen
Edda Weßlau: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
→Weblinks
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 23: | Zeile 23: | ||
Inadequate regulations | Inadequate regulations | ||
But doubts surrounding plea bargains have not been put to rest. Wesslau insists that Germany's parliament was dishonest when it wrote that judges were still obliged to find out the truth of a case. | But doubts surrounding plea bargains have not been put to rest. Wesslau insists that Germany's parliament was dishonest when it wrote that judges were still obliged to find out the truth of a case. | ||
"[As a judge], I would be wanting to shorten a trial through a deal, and I would want to avoid having to go through the whole process of hearing all the evidence. That certainly has an effect on the process of finding out the truth of a case." Even the presumption of innocence is affected, Wesslau says. "If one wants to enter into a deal, one is already assuming that the prosecution's case is true." | "[As a judge], I would be wanting to shorten a trial through a deal, and I would want to avoid having to go through the whole process of hearing all the evidence. That certainly has an effect on the process of finding out the truth of a case." Even the presumption of innocence is affected, Wesslau says. "If one wants to enter into a deal, one is already assuming that the prosecution's case is true." A shorter time in prison may seem like a good exchange for a quick confession | ||
A shorter time in prison may seem like a good exchange for a quick confession | |||
Critics also note what they call the "penalty gap." That "gap" has to do with the judge's ability to threaten the defendant, either with a particularly light sentence for a confession or a particularly heavy one if the defendant fights the case. That, says Wesslau, puts the judge in a position that is against the principle under which he or she is supposed to be an independent, neutral party. The judge is even allowed to propose the deal in order to shorten the trial. | Critics also note what they call the "penalty gap." That "gap" has to do with the judge's ability to threaten the defendant, either with a particularly light sentence for a confession or a particularly heavy one if the defendant fights the case. That, says Wesslau, puts the judge in a position that is against the principle under which he or she is supposed to be an independent, neutral party. The judge is even allowed to propose the deal in order to shorten the trial. | ||
"He's no longer neutral if he agrees to a deal in which the premise is, 'This is the perpetrator, more or less as described by the prosecution,'" Wesslau says. | "He's no longer neutral if he agrees to a deal in which the premise is, 'This is the perpetrator, more or less as described by the prosecution,'" Wesslau says. | ||