No-contest pleas an easy way out

There?s no such thing as being a little bit pregnant or somewhat dead, so why is it that we allow criminals to cut corners when they are taking deals that benefit them, allowing them to sidestep being totally guilty, at least when it comes to public perception?

The way I look at it, you?re either guilty or not guilty. There should be no gray area when it comes to entering a plea bargain in criminal court. However, the law allows this deniability for persons who don?t want to own up to their crimes, allowing them to enter best-interest or no-contest pleas.

Sure, when all is said and done, entering a best-interest or no-contest plea has the same legal effect as entering a guilty plea when it comes to incarceration and punishment. However, allowing criminals to enter these pleas leaves them one last claim of innocence, and one last chance to slap the victims in the face.

We see these pleas mostly in sex cases where sex offenders, while accepting long prison sentences, cannot bring themselves to admit their guilt before the world. They are ashamed of themselves, as well they should be, yet, they do not want to own up to their wrongdoing. Pamela Rogers entered a no-contest plea, just to name one of many, seeing she is the most high profile sex offender from here.

While these people often go to jail after entering plea bargains, they more often than not tell people they are not guilty of the crime, but instead were taking the plea to avoid more jail time. They usually concoct an outrageous story about how they were set up or how they were victims of a conspiracy, which some simple-minded people actually believe. In the end, this allows them to call their victims ?liars? and paint themselves as wrongly prosecuted people who were victims of the system.

I think you and I realize innocent people don?t take plea offers which give them years in jail, or even days in jail, for a crime they did not commit. No, people plead guilty generally because they are guilty. You can wrap it up under a no-contest or best-interest plea but it?s all the same.

Frankly I don?t know why the law even allows these alternative plea entries seeing the person accepting the bargain is, in fact, getting a bargain. Folks don?t plea generally unless they are getting less time than what they would serve if they were convicted during trial, that is, unless they suddenly grow a conscience and want to make reparations for their crimes. No, if a person thinks they can beat the rap, they take their chance before a jury, even if they are guilty as the day is long.

Another offshoot of this deniability is that it undermines the system of rehabilitation of the offender when they are allowed to distance themselves from their crime. For a person to be rehabilitated, they first must admit there is something to be rehabilitated from. If they are allowed to continue with their ridiculous self-aggrandizing stories of a conspiracy against them, then they aren?t even being made to admit they did anything wrong. Therefore, you have a guilty person emerging from jail still claiming innocence and perhaps committing a similar crime again since they weren?t held accountable the first time.

Myself, I?d like to see the law make people admit their guilt before the world when they enter a plea. If they can?t take that step, then perhaps we just need to set them for trial and let them tell their outrageous stories to a jury of Warren countians and see how long it takes them to return with a guilty verdict and a nice long sentence.

Duane Sherrill is a reporter for the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].