Plea bargaining is undoubtedly a means by which courts, judges, and prosecutors speed up the sentencing process to move along their busy calendars from one case to the next. Defendants also use plea bargaining as a way to keep their crime quiet and avoid too much attention. In general, people on both sides want to avoid spending time and money, avoid publicity, and avoid problems. The defendants ultimately want to avoid extended prison time. On one side of the plea bargain we have guilty criminals accepting lower sentences than they deserve, and on the other we have innocent people who must choose between bad and worse. Like the cases of Carole LaRossa and Brian Banks respectively, which we will talk about later in the article. Both are excellent examples of how plea bargaining is not a complete means of resolving conflicts. (CITE) It is not surprising that, among both the guilty and the innocent, plea bargaining is the best and sometimes the only option; leading to an influx of cases resolved as such and resolved quickly. This influx of quick convictions has led to mass incarceration and overpopulated prisons. We must then ask ourselves the question: to what extent does the end justify the means? Is it ethical to continue the practice of plea bargaining if it lets the guilty escape, puts the innocent behind bars, and consumes our prisons? All of these questions lead to the conclusion that plea bargaining is corrupt and does not adequately represent a successful justice system. DESCRIPTION OF THE COURT The overall intent of the criminal justice system is to ensure justice for all by convicting and punishing offenders and helping them to stop offending, while protecting the innocent in the process. There are two main criminal systems: state and f...... middle of paper...... guilty of various charges (Fisher, 2003). In 1848, murder was classified into degrees by the legislature. This has strengthened modern accusation bargaining. It was also during this period that prosecutors used plea bargaining as a means to satisfy their own personal interests. At that point in history prosecutors were usually part-time civil servants with full-time private law practices. Plea bargaining allowed them to spend less time on meaningless trials and more time on private cases that earned them money. For these prosecutors, trials were a waste of money. The Legislature would not pay the costs of prosecutions, so prosecutors would lose money if they couldn't reach a deal with defendants to pursue lesser charges. This is some of the first evidence that plea bargaining has become so popular largely due to the incentive to avoid trial and costs (Fisher, 2003).