Sentencing the Self-Convicted: The Ethics of Pleading Guilty

(Hardback)

Available Formats

Publishing Details

Classifications

Physical Properties

Description

This book addresses the fundamental ethical and legal aspects, penal consequences, and social context arising from a citizens acceptance of guilt. The focus is upon sentencing people who have pleaded guilty; in short, post-adjudication, rather than issues arising from discussions in the pretrial phase of the criminal process. The vast majority of defendants across all common law jurisdictions plead guilty and as a result receive a reduced sentence. Concessions by a defendant attract more lenient State punishment in all western legal systems. The concession is significant: At a stroke, a guilty plea relieves the State of the burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and in open court. Plea-based sentencing has become even more visible in recent years. The book provides insightful commentary on the following questions: - If an individual voluntarily accepts guilt, should the State receive this plea without further investigation or any disinterested adjudication - Is it ethically acceptable to allow suspects and defendants, to self-convict in this manner, without independent confirmation and evidence to support a conviction - If it is acceptable, what is the appropriate State response to such offenders - If the defendant is detained pretrial, the ability to secure release in return for a plea may be particularly enticing. Might it be too enticing, resulting in wrongful convictions

Author Bio

Julian V Roberts is Professor of Criminology at the University of Oxford, UK. Jesper Ryberg is Professor of Ethics and Philosophy of Law at Roskilde University, Denmark.