How Do You Plead? Guilty or Not?

Most people likely consider a criminal conviction a prerequisite for a prison term. However, we live in an era where a guilty plea often gets a newly minted convict released from a correctional facility. This reversal of expectations is among the little-known realities of the plea-bargaining process and how the court imposes sentences on those who admit their guilt in Canada. Over a four-month period, I observed four plea courtrooms at the Ontario Court of Justice located at 10 Armoury St, Toronto, ON. Over 29 days of courtroom observation, I focused on court practices and interactions between court actors. More specifically, I documented what happened and what was said in court, including details about the circumstances of an accused’s life, the nature of the allegations, and sentences imposed. Despite courts being dedicated to hearing guilty pleas, very few cases proceeded as expected. Of the 800 observed cases, 63.5% (n=508) were adjourned to another day, and only 18.4% (n=147) were resolved; other consistent outcomes included a withdrawal (n=24, 3%) or traversal (n=49, 6.12%). This project reveals the critical importance of further research into plea court reform, sentencing patterns, and the life circumstances of an accused. At the Ontario Court of Justice, the pleading process has proven to be unceremonious, with consistent human rights violations behind the scenes, and a lack of rehabilitative efforts at the forefront of each case. An abundance of cases weighing down the criminal justice system has led to the overincarceration of those presumed innocent and lenient sentences as a result. Pre-factors to crime are evident in a plea court room, with mental health issues, addiction, and poverty used as mitigation consistently. Overall, I observed sentencing patterns following a paradigm that benefits the system rather than the accused. Institutional inequalities set the precedent for society, and the call for reform is more important than ever.