White-collar crimes are those committed by high-ranking individuals, including executives, elected officials, and business owners. Street offenses, on the other hand, are crimes perpetrated on the streets by people who are typically poor or homeless. The processing of white-collar offenders differs significantly from the processing of ordinary street offenders since while the former are allowed plea deals, the latter are often rejected such an option.
Investigations into white-collar crimes are frequently conducted by specialized organizations such as the FBI and the SEC. These organizations have the capacity to carry out extensive investigations and compile information to make a compelling case against the criminal (McCarthy et al., 2019). White-collar offenders frequently have the chance to discuss a plea deal after an indictment is made. In contrast, local law enforcement agencies typically check street offenders (McCarthy et al., 2019). Due to limited resources, time, and funding, investigations at these organizations are frequently hastened. Offenders frequently do not have the option to discuss a plea bargain.
Ford was accused of reckless homicide, a crime with harsh punishments, in the Ford Pinto trial. Ford presented a number of defenses to keep the case outside of Indiana’s courtroom. The man contended that the charge should be overturned because it could not be tried under Indiana’s legislation against reckless homicide, and Indiana’s legislation did not cover businesses against reckless homicide (McCarthy et al., 2019). The court disagreed, concluding that Indiana law permitted criminal prosecution of companies (McCarthy et al., 2019). Additionally, Ford claimed that the indictment was illegal since there was no proof that the company had been careless (McCarthy et al., 2019).
The court rejected this argument since a car was manufactured with a known design flaw that caused several fatalities and injuries (McCarthy et al., 2019). The law governing corporate crime has been significantly impacted by the Ford Pinto trial. It showed that even when decisions were made as a consequence of cost-benefit analysis, organizations might still face criminal charges. As a result of the trial, there are now stricter regulations governing product liability.
Hence, the way white-collar offenders are handled in the criminal justice system is very different from how regular street offenders are handled because although the former are permitted plea deals, the latter are frequently denied such a choice. The Ford Pinto trial showed that businesses might be charged with crimes for their deeds. As a result, the legislation governing corporate crime underwent considerable alteration.
Reference
McCarthy, B. J., Braswell, M. C., McCarthy, B. R. (2019). Justice, crime, and ethics. Taylor & Francis.