Discounted justice: The potential misuse of Alford pleas for future exonorees

• We examine of the use of the Alford plea in the West Memphis Three case.
• The potential of misuse of this plea could become rampant.
• The legal incentive to use the Alford plea instead of exoneration and compensation should be worrisome.
• Use of Alford plea by a powerful system could bully the less fortunate in terms of legal wrangling for freedoms and compensation.

The West Memphis Three case captivated the country over the past two decades for many reasons. The crime, a triple homicide of children, the lack of evidence and coerced confessions, the verdicts, and ultimately, the way the three men were released caused this to be international news. This paper examines the release of the three men using the Alford plea, a lesser-known option which allows them to ultimately plead no contest. The Alford plea, in this case, is used but the men possibly could have been exonerated, deemed wrongfully imprisoned, and then sued the state for millions of dollars. Next, a brief history of the Alford plea and its other uses are explored. Last, we will look at the implications and legal conflict that exists when using an Alford plea and discuss the uses and possible ramifications of this case on future cases within the legal realism theoretical framework.