NCJ Number
189215
Journal
British Journal of Criminology Volume: 41 Issue: 2 Dated: Spring 2001 Pages: 342-361
Date Published
2001
Length
20 pages
Annotation
Drawing on observation, interviews, and questionnaires, this study examined the importance of occupational cultures in the daily practices of legal personnel in France, with attention to the nature of the relationship between police and judicial supervisors of police in pretrial investigations.
Abstract
The French "Code de procedure penale" (CPP) sets out the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the police and those responsible for the supervision of criminal investigations. The police are responsible for recording crime, gathering evidence, and apprehending those who have committed offenses. They must inform the "procureur" of all crimes. In more serious or complex cases, an "information" is opened on the authority of the procureur and the "juge d'instruction" assumes responsibility for the investigation. In other instances, the police are under the direction of the procureur. Given the centrality of judicial supervision within the French pretrial process, little empirical work has been conducted to evaluate its success. In the author's own study of the investigation and prosecution of crime in France, field work was conducted in Paris, two large urban centers, a medium-sized town, and one small area of 170,000 inhabitants during the period 1993-94 and 1997-98. Researchers spent between 1 and 4 months at each site, located in the offices of procureurs, juges d'instruction, police, and gendarmes. Researchers observed the ways in which criminal investigations were directed and supervised daily, as well as the conduct of pretrial hearings and the questioning of suspects and witnesses. At the end of the observation period, researchers conducted 20 interviews, primarily with "magistrats," and received 37 questionnaire responses from procureurs and 12 from police. The study concludes that the police pretrial-investigation system structurally and ideologically excludes any defense personnel associated with a suspect or an accused person, while providing no real guarantee that the rights of the accused will be adequately protected by a "magistrature" whose commitment to the search for the truth regards the exercise of silence or a refusal to confess as being contrary to the aims of the inquiry. 67 footnotes and 36 references