It is a controversial strategy in which the offender negotiates with the prosecutor and agrees to plead guilty to one charge in favor of a lesser charge. Charge negotiations are to some extent effective in balancing the rights of victims, offenders, and society. It is effective for all parties in terms of resource efficiency. It is also effective in protecting society's rights as it increases criminal convictions. While charge negotiations reduce the sentence for the offender, this does not necessarily balance their rights as it puts pressure on them to plead guilty, which violates their right to a trial. They are also ineffective in balancing the rights of victims and society as crimes may go unpunished or punished inadequately. For example, in R v Loveridge [2013], Kieran Loveridge was sentenced to just four years after pleading guilty to manslaughter and other common assault charges. This caused outrage among Thomas Kelly's family and the public (The Australian, 9 November 2013). Victims may also feel pressured into accepting a plea deal by the prosecution, which violates their individual rights and their right to a trial. In the Sydney Morning Herald article "NSW Liberals urge plea deal review", four people pleaded guilty to a downgraded charge of indecent assault after originally being charged on four