Ever felt tempted to steal spoons from a café? Celebrity, Winona Ryder, took her first step into the kleptomaniac world by stealing a spoon from a café. Soon after taking her first item, she was addicted. However, spoons didn’t mean anything to her, it was just the fact that she got a thrill out of it. Following her first incident, she began stealing other small items that meant nothing to her. After she had taken these items, she started feeling guilty but it still didn’t stop there. In addition, she spent a lot of her nights up late crying and trying to figure out a way to stop because she knew that she could get fired from her job, go to prison, and was also upsetting her family too. However, when she would get up the following day, it was like she had forgotten everything and went back to the way she was before, stealing again (Secret women’s sickness pars 2-5). After she kept up her stealing, she was caught.

“Winona Ryder was found guilty November 6, 2002 on two counts of stealing $5,500 worth of designer goods from Saks Fifth Avenue in Beverly Hills, California”(Allen, Colin par. 1). Winona’s punishment is still not determined. However, it was said that she would be on probation, pay a fine, and spend three years in jail (Colin, Allen par. 1). While in court, Winona had made up a lie. She had told the court that she was just practicing for a new movie because was going to be playing a part as a kleptomaniac. She was also arrested December 2002 for stealing a camera from the same store (Secret women’s sickness pars. 6-7). As many people know, Winona Ryder by far had enough money to pay for mostly everything she wants. This makes her a perfect example of a kleptomaniac.

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.