What if I told you there's a way to plead in court that's neither guilty nor not guilty.

A plea born from fear, legal strategy, and one man's fight to avoid the ultimate punishment.

It's called the offered plea, and it's as gray as the justice system gets.

Today we're diving into its origins, starting with a heated argument at a party in 1970

that left one man dead and another facing the death penalty.

We'll follow how this case climbed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and went on to impact

cases like the West Memphis 3 and Michael Peterson.

This is a story about how the legal system found middle ground, one that still sparks

debate about justice, fear, and compromise.

But before I get into that story,

if you like your true crime brief and bingeable, you found the right podcast. I give you at least

two episodes per week, so hit the follow button now and welcome to 10-minute murder.

When a case heads to court, the script usually follows one of two familiar paths. First, the defendant might plead guilty, which speeds things up by skipping straight to the sentencing phase, like the express lane at the grocery store,

accepts instead of groceries its consequences. Second, they might plead not guilty, which sets

off a courtroom showdown. And here's how that typically plays out. The prosecution meticulously

assembles their case, piling up evidence like the building a jinga tower,

hoping it's sturdy enough to convince the court beyond a reasonable doubt.

Meanwhile, the defense gets their shot to argue their side of things,

presenting evidence and cross-examining witnesses to prove their client is not guilty.

This legal tug-of-war continues into a judge or jury decides the defendant's fate. Guilty or not guilty. This legal tug of war continues into a judge or jury decides the defendant's

fate. Guilty or not guilty? End of story. Or is it? What most people don't realize is that

in many states across the U.S., there's a third option. It's an increasingly popular plea,

...