Pleading for Freedom and the Quest for Justice: A Qualitative Study of the Decision-Making Process of Factually Innocent Defendants During Plea Bargaining
Open Access DepositedDownloadable Content
Over 97% of the United States federal convictions are achieved through plea bargaining. Disturbingly many of the plea bargains are being made by innocent defendants. Currently, the leading defendant decision-making theory is the shadow of a trial model. This qualitative study was guided by the following research question: How do factually innocent defendants make the decision to accept or reject the plea deal offered during plea bargaining? Applying a conceptual framework involving sensemaking and decision-making strategies, this study addressed the need to better understand how factually innocent defendants make plea bargaining decisions in the real world. This study engaged eight to share their experiences with the criminal legal system and plea bargaining and how they decided to accept or reject the plea offer. Data were collected through an information questionnaire, in-depth semi-structured interviews, on-line post-conviction participant interviews, and available video recordings of court proceedings and court documents. Findings revealed three distinct phases during which factually innocent defendants experienced a significant disrupting event that triggered an immediate reaction and sensemaking process influencing plea bargaining decision-making: the arrest phase, the pre-conviction phase and the post-conviction phase. This study’s findings indicate that factually innocent defendants are anchored and adamant about their innocence throughout the decision-making process, specific contextual factors such as past experience, identity in relation to the charge(s), and attorney trust influence defendant plea bargaining decision-making, the plea bargaining decision-making process fluctuates along an intuitive to rational continuum, and factually innocent decision-making during plea bargaining is complex and unpredictable. Defendant sensemaking and decision-making within the plea bargaining environment are interactive and on-going involving mutually constituting macro and micro processes that affect defendant sensemaking and decision-making. As such, the current leading defendant decision-making model, the shadow of a trial model, does not adequately represent the complex and unpredictable nature of factually innocent defendant decision-making during plea bargaining. Plea bargaining occurs largely in the shadows without adequate oversight, documentation, or transparency. Practical improvements must be made that provide oversight for all actors in the plea process and increases plea bargaining transparency. Additionally, more interdisciplinary real-world research is needed that embraces methodological diversity as well as the holistic complexity found in defendant plea bargaining decision-making. Plea bargaining occurs largely in the shadows without adequate oversight, documentation, or transparency. Practical improvements must be made that provide oversight for all actors in the plea process and increases plea bargaining transparency. Additionally, more interdisciplinary real-world research is needed that embraces methodological diversity as well as the holistic complexity found in defendant plea bargaining decision-making.
- All rights reserved
Notice to Authors
If you are the author of this work and you have any questions about the information on this page, please use the Contact form to get in touch with us.