For the majority of criminal cases, the impact of victim’s feelings and concerns in the matter of sentencing processes is undoubtedly limited. Since a great number of cases in Canada are determined by the outcome of a plea bargain, victims in many jurisdictions are excluded. In the article taken from the December 1st issue of the Toronto Star called “Judge removes restraints on Homolka”, demonstrates the impact of the introduction to plea bargaining in the Criminal Justice System.

The problem with plea bargaining being entered in the criminal justice system is a controversial issue. Whereby, those accused plea guilty for the fact that by doing so allows them to exchange for the promise of a benefit. For criminals are aware of these proceedings, they often co-operate and do as they are told because they can expect a more lenient sentence than would have been the case had they pleaded not guilty and then been convicted at trial. This article about Karla Homolka, is a prime example of the controversial issue about plea bargaining. Homolka was able to serve a twelve year manslaughter sentence because she agreed to plea guilty and obtain a deal with police in telling all evidence against her former husband, Bernardo. Even though it was clear to police and judges that Homolka participated to a large part of the sex killings and the drugging death of her younger sister, she was able to serve a minor sentence because of plea bargaining in our justice system. Although, plea bargaining can be an efficient way to solving some of the lower crimes, it should not be an option for more serious crimes. Justice is supposed to be claimed by the victim and their family not the criminals.