NCJ Number
74499
Date Published
1979
Length
58 pages
Annotation
Criticisms of Great Britain's positing of the decision to prosecute with the police are presented, and retention of this police power is advocated.
Abstract
Within English law, the chief constable must decide whether or nor suspects are to be prosecuted and, if necessary, bring the prosecution or see that it is brought. Currently, there are criticisms of this system, mainly within the ranks of British attorneys. Critics argue (1) that independent critical judgment should decide the question of prosecution; (2) that as investigators of a case, police are biased; (3) that police lack the legal knowledge necessary to decide the question of prosecution; (4) that police prosecution encourages plea bargaining, a practice discouraged in Great Britain; and (5) that a system of independent public prosecutors would provide greater uniformity in enforcing criminal law. These criticisms, however, are not sufficient to detract from the advantages of the present system of police prosecution. The public supports the existing system, largely because it knows the police will aggressively but fairly pursue the prosecution of those who threaten public safety and order. The police prosecution division acts professionally and objectively in its decisions about prosecuting in accordance with objective criteria and in consultation with the director of public prosecutions. Further, because of the need to arrest suspected offenders and bring charges, which follows from the decision to prosecute, the procedure is logically continuous within the police agency. Requiring attorneys to make the decision to bring charges would cause even greater delays in the administration of justice, while adding more costs. A bibliography of 10 references is provided.