Negotiating about charges and pleas: Balancing Interests and justice

Geraldine Mackenzie, Andrew Vincent, John Zeleznikow

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

There is a worldwide movement towards alternatives to judicial decision-making for legal disputes. In the domain of criminal sentencing, in Western countries more than 95 % of cases are guilty pleas, with many being decided by negotiations over charges and pleas, rather than a decision being made after a judge or jury has heard all relevant evidence in a trial. Because decisions are being made, and people incarcerated on the basis of negotiations, it is important that such negotiations be just and fair. In this paper we discuss issues of fairness in plea-bargaining and how we can develop systems to support the process of plea and charge negotiation. We discuss how we are using Toulmin’s theory of argumentation and Lodder and Zeleznikow’s model of online dispute resolution to develop just plea bargaining systems. A specific investigation of the process of charge mentions is discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)577-594
Number of pages18
JournalGroup Decision and Negotiation
Volume24
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 10 Aug 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Decision making
justice
argumentation
fairness
decision making
Charge
Negotiating
Justice
evidence
Plea bargaining

Cite this

Mackenzie, Geraldine ; Vincent, Andrew ; Zeleznikow, John. / Negotiating about charges and pleas : Balancing Interests and justice. In: Group Decision and Negotiation. 2014 ; Vol. 24, No. 4. pp. 577-594.
@article{eb431b226e284748bb58d24e8be48596,
title = "Negotiating about charges and pleas: Balancing Interests and justice",
abstract = "There is a worldwide movement towards alternatives to judicial decision-making for legal disputes. In the domain of criminal sentencing, in Western countries more than 95 {\%} of cases are guilty pleas, with many being decided by negotiations over charges and pleas, rather than a decision being made after a judge or jury has heard all relevant evidence in a trial. Because decisions are being made, and people incarcerated on the basis of negotiations, it is important that such negotiations be just and fair. In this paper we discuss issues of fairness in plea-bargaining and how we can develop systems to support the process of plea and charge negotiation. We discuss how we are using Toulmin’s theory of argumentation and Lodder and Zeleznikow’s model of online dispute resolution to develop just plea bargaining systems. A specific investigation of the process of charge mentions is discussed.",
author = "Geraldine Mackenzie and Andrew Vincent and John Zeleznikow",
year = "2014",
month = "8",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1007/s10726-014-9405-7",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "577--594",
journal = "Group Decision and Negotiation",
issn = "0926-2644",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "4",

}

Negotiating about charges and pleas : Balancing Interests and justice. / Mackenzie, Geraldine; Vincent, Andrew; Zeleznikow, John.

In: Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 24, No. 4, 10.08.2014, p. 577-594.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Negotiating about charges and pleas

T2 - Balancing Interests and justice

AU - Mackenzie, Geraldine

AU - Vincent, Andrew

AU - Zeleznikow, John

PY - 2014/8/10

Y1 - 2014/8/10

N2 - There is a worldwide movement towards alternatives to judicial decision-making for legal disputes. In the domain of criminal sentencing, in Western countries more than 95 % of cases are guilty pleas, with many being decided by negotiations over charges and pleas, rather than a decision being made after a judge or jury has heard all relevant evidence in a trial. Because decisions are being made, and people incarcerated on the basis of negotiations, it is important that such negotiations be just and fair. In this paper we discuss issues of fairness in plea-bargaining and how we can develop systems to support the process of plea and charge negotiation. We discuss how we are using Toulmin’s theory of argumentation and Lodder and Zeleznikow’s model of online dispute resolution to develop just plea bargaining systems. A specific investigation of the process of charge mentions is discussed.

AB - There is a worldwide movement towards alternatives to judicial decision-making for legal disputes. In the domain of criminal sentencing, in Western countries more than 95 % of cases are guilty pleas, with many being decided by negotiations over charges and pleas, rather than a decision being made after a judge or jury has heard all relevant evidence in a trial. Because decisions are being made, and people incarcerated on the basis of negotiations, it is important that such negotiations be just and fair. In this paper we discuss issues of fairness in plea-bargaining and how we can develop systems to support the process of plea and charge negotiation. We discuss how we are using Toulmin’s theory of argumentation and Lodder and Zeleznikow’s model of online dispute resolution to develop just plea bargaining systems. A specific investigation of the process of charge mentions is discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930766466&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10726-014-9405-7

DO - 10.1007/s10726-014-9405-7

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 577

EP - 594

JO - Group Decision and Negotiation

JF - Group Decision and Negotiation

SN - 0926-2644

IS - 4

ER -