Dq 1 and 2 Dq 1 There are a few ethical dilemmas that arises during the process of plea bargaining One of the main issues I notice is that oftentimes one individual of offered a plea if he or she offers up information that could convict another individual Is it ethical to ask one individual to rat out another to save investigators from providing proof in some other way Another ethical issue that occurs is when an individual gives up his or her right to judgement by his or her peers In this country we are all allowed that option and if an individual feels forced into accepting a plea deal strictly to save time and money is that fair Deontological thinking focuses on the act and if the act was done with the hopes of a good outcome but the outcome was negative instead the act is still ethical because of the intentions it was committed with This would suggest that criminals could insist that their actions were good natured but something went wrong in the process Teleological thinking believes that an act is committed and the outcome is judged If the outcome is good the act is ethical if the outcome is bad the act is unethical I believe that ethical formalism is the best way to handle this dilemma If an individual s ethics are questioned and a decision made that decision should stand true for all others placed in the same situation Ethical formalism states that moral actions are universal If someone whom I loved was injured or traumatized in some manner by a criminal I would want that individual to stand trial and have the maximum punishment inflicted on that individual so according to ethical formalism part of the deontological way of thinking this should be the case for all individuals no other individual should get a lesser sentence It may not be the most economical or time friendly but if time and money were not an issue with the judicial system it is the route I would take Dq 2 It is my personal belief that not all judges can be 100 unbiased I grew up in a small town about 30 50 thousand people there one judge This man was well liked in the community and his legal work was respected reasons he was elected to the position Over time this man knew all of the police officers sheriff s deputies lawyers a majority of the community members etc Because this individual had been a part of the legal community for years he had developed friendships and loyalties which could create a bias Biases no matter how small can impact a case What if a judge had a family member who had been killed by a drunk driver Would that judge be a able to try a drunk driving case without bias It is my belief that he or she wouldn t The main ethical issue that arises if a judge is unbiased is if the individual who is facing the judge is being treated fairly If a judge has a friendship with the defendant s lawyer is the defendant more likely to win It would be interesting to see if there are any studies that look into this type of bias
View Full Document
Unlocking...