This article assesses the extent to which current guilty-plea procedure is consistent with
legitimations of criminal convictions, with a focus on decision-making in child defendants. I argue
that in the context of plea decisions, the criminal justice system should ensure that defendants
make decisions that result in accurate ...
This article assesses the extent to which current guilty-plea procedure is consistent with
legitimations of criminal convictions, with a focus on decision-making in child defendants. I argue
that in the context of plea decisions, the criminal justice system should ensure that defendants
make decisions that result in accurate convictions, that are reached in a fair way that respects
rights. The current system does not do this due to an almost exclusive focus on defendant
autonomy. In the case of children, this is likely to be leading to illegitimate convictions, most
importantly children pleading guilty when innocent. Drawing on psychological theory, I develop
a model of plea decision-making and draw on this model to identify relevant vulnerabilities of
child defendants. Based on this analysis, and drawing on empirical data, I identify ways in which
current procedure in England and Wales may be leading to systematic problems with the
legitimacy of convictions of children, and suggest reforms to enhance such legitimacy.
