A prosecutor may wish to maintain a high conviction rate or avoid the loss of high-level trials, thereby creating the potential for advocacy that favours their interests, but reduces the potential for prosecution and punishment to deter crimes.  Prosecutors may also make prosecution decisions that have a significant impact on an accused`s sentence, and may lay charges or propose arguments that themselves induce an innocent accused to consider or accept a plea. Negotiated arguments account for more than 90% of all criminal proceedings. There are a number of incentives that explain why less than 10 per cent of criminal trials come to trial: The history of American arguments is rather obscure, not least because in most countries and jurisdictions, negotiations until the late 1960s were deemed inappropriate. Some of the first arguments took place during the colonial era during the Salem Witch Trials in 1692, when the accused witches were told that they would live if they were confessed, but would be executed if they did not. The judges of Salem wanted to promote the confession, and to discover other witches, they wanted the avowed witches to testify against others. The guilty verdict saved many witches accused of execution. Later, the Salem Witch Trials were used to illustrate one of the strongest arguments against pleas: that the practice sometimes leads innocent defendants to plead guilty. Another situation in which an innocent accused can plead guilty is the case of an accused who cannot obtain bail and is detained in a prison or detention centre. Since it can take months or even years before criminal cases are tried or even charged in some jurisdictions, an innocent accused, who will be offered a plea, which includes a sentence of less time than they would spend in prison before waiting for a charge or trial, can accept oral arguments and plead guilty.  The main reason for the plea is that it must be based on the defendant`s free will, on equality between the parties and on the extension of the protection of the defendant`s rights: defendants naturally also benefit from denseness because they can limit the seriousness of the sanctions to which they are subjected and give security to an otherwise unpredictable procedure.