Public Perceptions of Plea Bargaining

This article explores the public’s perceptions of plea bargaining. The first half of the article unpacks the perceptions of plea bargaining through the eyes of “insiders” and “outsiders.” Insiders are practitioners and scholars, while outsiders are the average person. The article notes that insiders’ perceptions of plea bargaining arise out of practice, law review articles, and other sources of scholarship. Outsiders’ perceptions of plea bargaining, on the other hand, arise out of the portrayal of the practice in popular media and TV. In the second half of this article, the author reviews the findings of a study that she conducted. The study was designed to further explore the public’s perception of plea bargaining, especially considering the limited number of studies that directly address how the public understands and feels about the practice. The study participants were law students.  A few of the more notable findings of the study revealed that many of the respondents to the study understood plea bargaining as an efficiency mechanism. Many respondents also felt that defendants benefitted most directly from plea agreements. In addition, a large number of respondents noted that one of the main drawbacks to plea bargaining is when innocent people plead guilty. In conclusion, the author calls for more studies on the public perception of plea bargaining, from the average person’s perspective, so that public approval or disapproval of the practice may be more accurately assessed.

” It is particularly critical that scholars, lawyers, and advocates appreciate what the public understands about plea bargaining. The criminal justice system represents a fascinating intersection–it is a pop culture obsession (there have been dozens of new shows about the criminal system in recent years), an area of the law that the public has some real interaction with (more than 6 million people are under some form of criminal justice control) and an area of the law that the public has some meaningful control over (local district attorneys, for instance, are elected). Given this intersection, the criminal courts are a space where the gulf between public perceptions and reality has some meaning for the legitimacy of the system.” p. 154-55