Plea bargaining – in which accuser and accused strike a deal – is not an aspect of legal process with which anyone should feel comfortable. The defendant benefits from a lighter sentence than might, or might not, have been imposed. The prosecutor does not have to rely on the costly and uncertain outcome of a trial, and gains evidence that can be used to convict others. As a result, justice is neither done nor seen to be done.
The beneficiary of a plea bargain is someone who cannot safely be trusted, otherwise the issue could not have arisen. The most serious consequence, now well documented in the US, involves criminals who falsely incriminate others in order to gain their own freedom.
Nevertheless, it is easy to understand why plea bargaining is widely favoured by prosecutors and regulators as a means of dealing with complex financial cases. The issues are often difficult for judges and juries to understand and the defendants usually have resources which enable them to finance endless litigation. It may be too hard or costly to secure a conviction without the evidence and admissions provided through the plea bargain.