Final answer:
Plea bargaining offers reduced uncertainty and quicker resolutions to court cases, which are significant advantages. However, it can also lead to inequality in outcomes due to disparities in defendants' resources and potential pressure on innocent individuals to plead guilty.
Step-by-step explanation:
The pros and cons of plea bargaining as per the discussions in various legal contexts including Worrall would best align with option A: Advantages: reduced uncertainty, Disadvantages: inequality in outcomes. Plea bargaining is often seen as advantageous because it reduces the uncertainty and unpredictability associated with going to trial. Defendants can know what to expect and can often negotiate for lesser charges or reduced sentences. This can also ease the burden on court systems by resolving cases more quickly.
However, a significant disadvantage of plea bargaining is the potential for inequality in outcomes. Defendants with more resources, such as better lawyers or more familiarity with the legal system, may negotiate more favorable deals. Furthermore, critics argue that plea bargaining can pressure innocent people to plead guilty to avoid harsher sentences if convicted at trial, and it may undermine the right to a fair trial.
The evidence against the accused may be overwhelming, or they may wish to avoid the more serious penalties that could be imposed following a full trial. At the same time, prosecutors often seek plea bargains to secure a conviction on charges they are confident they can prove, while foregoing the risk associated with pursuing more serious but less certain charges.