Volume 5, numéro 2, automne 2024

EN :

False guilty pleas are a major source of wrongful convictions. They are also probably inevitable; innocent accused have powerful reasons for resolving their cases short of trial. Given this, it might be wise to add the plea of no contest to the Canadian criminal justice system. A no contest plea could offer advantages for innocent accused, including the opportunity to obtain a reduced sentence without having to publicly (but falsely) admit guilt. It could also bring benefits to the system itself. It could come with some social costs, but those costs might not outweigh the benefits. This paper seeks to encourage discussion of the idea of a contest plea by analyzing its pros and cons.

EN :

Drawing on a systematic literature review, this paper examines the scholarly discourse surrounding wrongful convictions and prosecutions in Latin America, spanning from 2010 to July 2023, across the WoS, Scopus, and SciELO databases, identifying a set of 50 publications. From a quantitative perspective, the paper inquiries into aspects such as publication year, countries covered, characteristics of the scientific community involved, and the topics addressed. Then, the paper briefly delves into a qualitative analysis of the publications’ content, distinguishing among those that address general aspects, factors contributing to wrongful convictions and prosecutions, correction mechanisms, and compensation mechanisms for wrongful convictions and prosecutions. Although with limitations, the findings provide an overview of research in this area in Latin America, showing that, although scholarship is still scarce compared with other latitudes, the topic has begun to attract interest in recent years in the region.

EN :

As exonerations have increased, so too has research into post-release challenges for wrongfully convicted individuals, including stigma, discrimination, mental illness, and inadequate support. In so doing, researchers and advocates have described this population in varied ways, which may elicit differing attitudes. To explore that possibility, 188 citizens read a tweet in which we varied the label ascribed to a newly released male prisoner (i.e., wrongly convicted, exonerated, innocent, or released/control), then reported their attitudes toward him. Contrary to expectations from the stereotype activation and labelling literature, different labels did not produce different judgements of the man’s character, criminality, or deservingness of support. Instead, perceptions were consistently more favourable for wrongfully convicted individuals (regardless of label) than other formerly incarcerated people (control). Troublingly however, the labels wrongly convicted, exonerated, and innocent still elicited some belief that the man was somehow involved in—or had committed—the crime for which he was erroneously convicted, that he may have committed other crimes in the past, and that he might commit crimes in the future. Implications are discussed in terms of stigma theory, growing media attention to wrongful convictions, and the disconnect between public and government support for post-exoneration services.