13

Alice has been charged with first degree murder, although the evidence is mostly circumstantial, and there is no body.

Alice’s attorney offers a plea bargain that Alice will disclose the location of the body in exchange for a lesser charge.

Can the prosecutor use the plea offer as evidence of guilt, since Alice is sort of admitting that she is involved and knows there is a body?

1
  • 2
    What is the jurisdiction of your question? Should it be tagged united-states Commented Nov 14, 2025 at 14:01

2 Answers 2

12

Mostly no, but with 3 exceptions:

1. If she brings it up first

in any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together

This means that if Alice makes any testimony in trial about what she said during a plea bargain, then the prosecution is able to disclose additional details that are normally protected to prevent the defendant from misrepresenting the conversation out of context. For example, if Alice testifies, "The prosecution would not give me a plea bargain unless I could tell them where the body is." then the prosecution could clarify that Alice indicated that she knew where the body was as part of the plea bargain discussion. This prevents her from abusing Rule 410 protection to defame the prosecution.

2. If her court testimony is different than what she said during a plea agreement

in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record, and with counsel present.

This means that if Alice says that she knows where the body is during a plea bargain, and then says in court that she does not know where the body is, then she can be charged with perjury, and the details of the plea bargain case can be discussed in the perjury case, but this does not extend to the original murder court case. In that case, she is still protected.

In practice this very rarely applies because perjury charges generally cannot or will not be pursued. You can only really make perjury charges stick when you have two conflicting statements that were both made under oath since lying unto itself is not a crime. Since plea agreement discussions are generally not under oath, saying you lied during one rarely leads anywhere. At most they could accuse her of obstruction of justice, but then they would have no evidence because the the conversation where she lied is protected.

3. If she waives her rights to Rule 410

This is generally a non-issue if Alice decides to reject the plea offer, but plea offers sometimes include Rule 410 waivers. So, if she were to for example enter into a no contest plea with a Rule 410 waiver, the prosecution could bring up the fact that she indicated that she knew where the body was, but it is a moot point because this means she has already come to a settlement agreement and will be charged for the crime as per the terms of the agreement.

2
  • 1
    So she could possibly be convicted of perjury (because she knew where the body was but said she did not under oath in the murder case), but still be acquitted due to lack of evidence in the murder case? And would it bee a possible defense strategy to claim that she simply lied during the plea bargain negotiations, because she tried to get one? (If no agreement has been reached.) Commented Nov 16, 2025 at 13:09
  • 2
    She could be accused perjury, but probably not convicted. Perjury charges are almost never pursued because you can only make them stick when you have two conflicting statements that were both made under oath. Since plea agreement discussions are generally not under oath, saying you lied during one rarely leads anywhere. At most they could accuse her of obstruction of justice... but then they would have no evidence because the the conversation where she lied is protected. Commented Nov 17, 2025 at 23:12
12

No

Plea bargain negotiations are confidential and inadmissible. Even the fact that they did or did not happen is inadmissible.

4
  • 2
    In the US this is Rule 410 Commented Nov 14, 2025 at 7:23
  • 4
    Can you provide a source and a jurisdiction where this applies? (although I assume this is fairly universal) Commented Nov 14, 2025 at 8:34
  • 7
    @NateEldredge This answer is too short and does not addresses the exceptions to the rule you cited, if the jurisdiction intended by Dale is indeed the USA. For example, the prosecution could try for the exemptions on 410(b) and make the statements admissible. Commented Nov 14, 2025 at 14:03
  • Also worth mentioning: an "Alford Plea" is a type of plea-bargain taken by someone who asserts their innocence. The 'classic' example is someone accused of murder making a plea to receive a lengthy prison sentence, because being found guilty after not making a plea would result in a death sentence. It gives time for future evidence of innocence to be found (much easier to release from prison than to un-execute someone); so a plea is not so much "evidence of guilt", as it is "evidence of doubt that they can prove their innocence to the jury". Commented Nov 16, 2025 at 19:01

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.