Private and Public Trouble: Prosecutors and the Allocation of Court Resources

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Private troubles are often made public through criminal prosecution. We argue that the decision to publicly prosecute a case involves a calculated allocation of court resources based on “strong case typification.” Support for this argument is found in a set of data made unique by their consideration of various types of evidence and the attributes of victims as well as defendants. Analysis focuses on a crucial point of entry into the criminal justice system, namely, the decision whether and how to criminally prosecute a case. In general, we find that cases involving serious crimes, strong evidence, credible witnesses, and presumably dangerous defendants are more likely to be fully and publicly prosecuted. And it is the troubles of older, white, male and employed victims that are considered worthy of public processing. Significantly, however, the influence of race becomes apparent only when the strength of evidence is held constant. The ironic reluctance of social scientists to consider the role of evidence in legal decision making is discussed.