U3AOS1 Topic 7: Plea negotiations

Key Knowledge Dot Point:

1. The purpose and appropriateness of plea negotiations.

Preface:

1. Typically, exam questions focus on three main components: outlining/describing/explaining what plea negotiations are, discussing/explaining when they are/are not appropriate, and discussing/analysing/evaluating their ability to achieve the principles of justice in a criminal case. As per the key skills section of the study design, students can be asked to 'evaluate' the ability of plea negotiations to achieve the principles of justice. The high-mark questions for this topic revolve around talking about the appropriateness of plea negotiations and their ability to achieve the principles of justice.

Plea negotiations:

1. Plea negotiations are discussions between the prosecution and the accused which aim to resolve a criminal case by having the accused plead guilty to the criminal charges laid. 
2. Plea negotiations can allow an accused to plead guilty to fewer charges with the remaining not proceeding, to a lesser charge or it can allow for an agreement to be made about the facts of which the plea is based upon.
3. Plea negotiations can occur in relation to both summary and indictable offences.
4. Plea negotiations DO NOT determine the sentence of the offender.
5. Plea negotiations can occur at any stage of the criminal case.
6. Plea negotiations can ensure that in the case where a plea negotiation is unsuccessful, the prosecution cannot use what was said in the negotiation as admissible evidence in court to prove that the accused is guilty.

Purposes of plea negotiations:

1. Plea negotiations can help secure a conviction. That is, a successful plea negotiation ensures that the accused pleads guilty, which is specifically paramount in cases where the prosecution does not have strong admissible evidence to prove the accused's guilt. It is also paramount in securing a conviction in cases where witnesses are unwilling or reluctant to provide evidence in court due to various potential factors. Thus, a successful plea negotiation helps ensure a conviction. 
2. Plea negotiations can help avoid or reduce the costs associated with a criminal case. Specifically, in cases where an early plea negotiation is successful, it can prevent the case needing to go to trial which can be very costly to the parties. This is paramount in cases where the accused is concerned with costs. Typically, in exam questions, the stimulus will provide hints regarding whether the accused is concerned with the costs. 
3. Plea negotiations can help avoid the stress and trauma of a criminal case. In cases where the victim(s) or their family have suffered psychological trauma from the offending, a plea negotiation can allow for them to feel solace as it can ensure a conviction. Moreover, for witnesses that are hesitant to provide evidence in court due to the trauma they have experienced, an early successful plea negotiation can ensure that they do not have to provide trauma and potentially have their trauma exacerbated. 
4. Plea negotiations can help provide a timely efficient resolution of a criminal case. Where an early plea negotiation is successful, it can allow for the offender to avoid the need of having their case to go to the courts to be resolved. This ensures that the lengthy time processes of the court's are avoided such as the jury empanelment process. In particular, it avoids the high backlog of court cases in the Victorian court hierarchy. Thus, plea negotiations can help ensure a timely efficient resolution of a case.

Circumstances where plea negotiations are appropriate:

1. Plea negotiations are appropriate when the parties are concerned with costs.
2. Plea negotiations are appropriate when an accused is willing to plead guilty.
3. Plea negotiations are appropriate when the parties wish to avoid the costs and time associated with a trial.
4. Plea negotiations are appropriate when witnesses may be reluctant or unable to give evidence, which may adversely affect the prosecution's capacity to prove the accused's guilt. Thus, a successful plea negotiation can help secure a conviction in these situations.

Circumstances where plea negotiations are not appropriate:

1. Plea negotiations are not appropriate when the accused is not willing to plead guilty.
2. Plea negotiations are not appropriate when the accused has been charged with a very serious criminal offence. In such cases, engaging in a plea negotiation that results in the accused pleading guilty to a lesser charge or fewer charges altogether may not align with the public's best interests. 

Plea negotiations and their ability to uphold the principles of justice: fairness, equality and access:

How Plea Negotiations Uphold Fairness:

1. Plea negotiations can enhance fairness by allowing the accused to actively participate in the criminal justice process and make informed decisions about how their case is resolved. A successful plea negotiation can secure a conviction where the prosecution lacks strong admissible evidence or where victims or witnesses are unwilling or reluctant to give evidence in court. This provides an alternative avenue for resolving criminal cases that avoids the uncertainty of a trial, reduces the emotional burden on victims and witnesses, and ensures that the accused is dealt with according to the circumstances of the case.
2. Plea negotiations promote fairness by providing a practical and balanced method of resolving criminal cases where a trial may be inappropriate or unfeasible. In situations where witnesses are unwilling or reluctant to give evidence, or where key evidence is inadmissible, plea negotiations allow the accused to accept responsibility for a lesser charge or reduced facts, thereby securing a conviction without requiring the matter to proceed to trial. This ensures that the prosecution is not forced to pursue weak or unreliable cases, protects victims and witnesses from the stress and trauma of giving evidence, and enables the accused to be dealt with according to the strength of the case against them. As a result, plea negotiations support fair outcomes by balancing the interests of the accused, the victims, and the broader justice system.

How Plea Negotiations Fail To Uphold Fairness:

1. Where a plea negotiation results in the accused pleading guilty to a charge that does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending, it may create a perception that the accused has been ‘let off’. This can undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system and lead the community to view the outcome as unfair, particularly where the final charge or sentence fails to reflect the harm caused to the victim or the gravity of the offence.
2. Plea negotiations may undermine the achievement of fairness because they are conducted in private, limiting transparency and failing to satisfy the public element of a fair trial. As a result, the community and victims may be unable to observe how decisions are reached, which can reduce confidence in the justice system and create perceptions that outcomes are unfair or lacking accountability.
3. Where a victim or their family opposes a plea negotiation but the prosecution proceeds with an agreement with the accused, the outcome may be perceived as unjust by those directly affected. This can leave victims feeling excluded from the decision-making process and undermine their confidence in the criminal justice system, particularly where the negotiated outcome does not align with their expectations of accountability or justice.

How Plea Negotiations Uphold Equality:

1. Plea negotiations promote equality by ensuring that, regardless of an accused person’s individual characteristics, all accused persons have the opportunity to engage in a plea negotiation where the circumstances of the case make it appropriate. Decisions to enter into plea negotiations are based on legal factors such as the strength of the evidence and the nature of the offence, rather than personal characteristics of the accused. As a result, accused individuals are treated equally before the law, supporting consistent and impartial decision-making within the criminal justice system.
2. Both the accused and the prosecution may initiate a plea negotiation, ensuring that each party has an equal opportunity to engage in the negotiation process. This mutual ability to request negotiations promotes balanced participation in the criminal justice system and reduces disparity between the parties, supporting equality before the law.

How Plea Negotiations Fail To Uphold Equality:

1. Plea negotiations are not available to all accused persons, as they can only occur where the prosecution agrees to enter into negotiations. As a result, not every accused person has an equal opportunity to engage in a plea negotiation, which may limit the extent to which equality before the law is achieved.

How Plea Negotiations Uphold Access:

1. Plea negotiations enhance access to justice by saving court time and resources through resolving criminal cases before they proceed to trial. By reducing the number of matters that require a full hearing, plea negotiations minimise delays within the court system and free up judicial resources for cases that genuinely require a trial. This improves the overall efficiency of the criminal justice system and makes it more accessible for individuals whose matters must be heard by a court.

How Plea Negotiations Fail To Uphold Access:

1. Where a plea negotiation results in the accused pleading guilty to a charge that does not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending, victims and their families may feel denied meaningful access to justice. In such circumstances, the negotiated outcome may limit victims’ ability to have the full extent of the harm recognised by the court, reducing their sense that justice has been properly achieved.
2. Access to plea negotiations may be limited for some accused persons because a plea negotiation can only occur if the prosecution agrees to enter into it. As a result, not all accused individuals have the same opportunity to resolve their matter through plea negotiations, which can restrict access to this aspect of the criminal justice process.
3. Plea negotiations are conducted in private, meaning that victims, their families, and the wider community are unable to observe or participate in the negotiation process. This limits transparency and engagement, reducing the extent to which access to justice is achieved for those affected by the offence.