@wajoma said
We should take a moment to really appreciate what screwball suzi said here:
"A plea deal is generally taken by those who are guilty to avoid being found guilty and doing time."
Either way it's a corruption, either an innocent person lies to avoid wrongful punishment, or as screwy suzi says here, a guilty person by some majic becomes not guilty.
The incentive is to lie.
You really haven't a clue how the law works.
When the prosecution has such a strong case that the defence knows it has no reasonable chance of disputing it, "beyond a reasonable doubt", then the defence can offer to turn "state's witness" and hope for a lesser sentence. This is no "incentive to lie"; it's recognising that you committed a crime and taking a step to do what you should have done all along, which was to cooperate with the legal authorities.
Now, in the case of Powell, she is on record saying that no reasonable person would have believed Trump's lies about election fraud, and her defence, as absurd as it now seems, was that she had an unlimited right of freedom of speech to propagate such lies. First, there is no such unlimited right; freedom of speech does not cover shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre with intent to cause a stampede when there is no fire. The judges have ruled consistently that shouting "stop the steal! go to the Capitol on Jan. 6th and stop the certification process!" was, in effect, equivalent to shouting "FIRE!" in a theatre,
because there was no massive fraud--and Powell
knew that.
And second, what she's is charged with is tampering with sealed voting machines. She was caught on video doing just that. The defence hadn't a leg to stand on, hence the plea bargain.