2019SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Public Perceptions of Plea Bargaining

Thea Johnson

Open full text 11 citations

Abstract

Several studies indicate that the public disapproves of plea bargaining, the most common method of resolving cases in the criminal system. However, such studies assume a common understanding of plea bargaining with no basis for this assumption. Although there are a few basic constitutional requirements for a plea bargain, what it is, why it is used, and how plea bargains are performed remains a matter of some debate. Scholars, for instance, paint a particularly dark picture of plea bargaining, where, among other flaws, the innocent are regularly coerced into pleading. This view of plea bargaining is quite different from the version portrayed on TV, where the guilty are punished, the innocent spared, and plea bargains provide only as much benefit to a defendant as a reasonable society can tolerate. Given these disparate views, this essay asks: what does the public understand a plea bargain to be? In (partial) response to this question, this essay does three things. First, it examines the gulf between insider narratives, among practitioners and scholars, and outsider narratives, such as portrayals of plea bargaining on fictionalized legal dramas, about how and why plea bargaining happens. Second, it asks: What narrative, if any, does the public believe about plea bargaining? It reviews the scholarship in the field of public perceptions of plea bargaining and finds that although the literature provides some evidence that the public disapproves of plea bargaining, the average person’s understanding of the plea bargain is essentially unknown. In response to this lack of research, this essay lays out the findings of a study, conducted by the author, about perceptions of plea bargaining among a group of law students and finds that this population adopts pieces from each narrative in their understanding of plea bargaining. Third, this essay concludes with an explanation of why it is critical to study the public’s understanding of plea bargaining and proposes some areas of future study. Given that the criminal justice system touches the lives of so many people in the country and that plea bargaining is the primary means of resolving cases in the criminal system, the public’s conception about this secretive practice has meaningful implications for the legitimacy of the system itself.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Several studies indicate that the public disapproves of plea bargaining, the most common method of resolving cases in the criminal system. However, such studies assume a common understanding of plea bargaining with no basis for this assumption. Although there are a few basic constitutional requirements for a plea bargain, what it is, why it is used, and how plea bargains are performed remains a matter of some debate. Scholars, for instance, paint a particularly dark picture of plea bargaining, where, among other flaws, the innocent are regularly coerced into pleading. This view of plea bargaining is quite different from the version portrayed on TV, where the guilty are punished, the innocent spared, and plea bargains provide only as much benefit to a defendant as a reasonable society can tolerate. Given these disparate views, this essay asks: what does the public understand a plea bargain to be? In (partial) response to this question, this essay does three things. First, it examines the gulf between insider narratives, among practitioners and scholars, and outsider narratives, such as portrayals of plea bargaining on fictionalized legal dramas, about how and why plea bargaining happens. Second, it asks: What narrative, if any, does the public believe about plea bargaining? It reviews the scholarship in the field of public perceptions of plea bargaining and finds that although the literature provides some evidence that the public disapproves of plea bargaining, the average person’s understanding of the plea bargain is essentially unknown. In response to this lack of research, this essay lays out the findings of a study, conducted by the author, about perceptions of plea bargaining among a group of law students and finds that this population adopts pieces from each narrative in their understanding of plea bargaining. Third, this essay concludes with an explanation of why it is critical to study the public’s understanding of plea bargaining and proposes some areas of future study. Given that the criminal justice system touches the lives of so many people in the country and that plea bargaining is the primary means of resolving cases in the criminal system, the public’s conception about this secretive practice has meaningful implications for the legitimacy of the system itself.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Several studies indicate that the public disapproves of plea bargaining, the most common method of resolving cases in the criminal system. However, such studies assume a common understanding of plea bargaining with no basis for this assumption. Although there are a few basic constitutional requirements for a plea bargain, what it is, why it is used, and how plea bargains are performed remains a matter of some debate. Scholars, for instance, paint a particularly dark picture of plea bargaining, where, among other flaws, the innocent are regularly coerced into pleading. This view of plea bargaining is quite different from the version portrayed on TV, where the guilty are punished, the innocent spared, and plea bargains provide only as much benefit to a defendant as a reasonable society can tolerate. Given these disparate views, this essay asks: what does the public understand a plea bargain to be? In (partial) response to this question, this essay does three things. First, it examines the gulf between insider narratives, among practitioners and scholars, and outsider narratives, such as portrayals of plea bargaining on fictionalized legal dramas, about how and why plea bargaining happens. Second, it asks: What narrative, if any, does the public believe about plea bargaining? It reviews the scholarship in the field of public perceptions of plea bargaining and finds that although the literature provides some evidence that the public disapproves of plea bargaining, the average person’s understanding of the plea bargain is essentially unknown. In response to this lack of research, this essay lays out the findings of a study, conducted by the author, about perceptions of plea bargaining among a group of law students and finds that this population adopts pieces from each narrative in their understanding of plea bargaining. Third, this essay concludes with an explanation of why it is critical to study the public’s understanding of plea bargaining and proposes some areas of future study. Given that the criminal justice system touches the lives of so many people in the country and that plea bargaining is the primary means of resolving cases in the criminal system, the public’s conception about this secretive practice has meaningful implications for the legitimacy of the system itself.

Key concepts: Plea, Narrative, Political science, Pleading, Law, Law and economics, Sociology, Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Public Perceptions of Plea Bargaining — Research Paper | ScholarLens