Call/WhatsApp: +1 914 416 5343

To what extent do the main agencies in the Criminal Justice System work co-cooperatively? Critically consider this point using 2 main agencies.

This paper is an analysis of the police and the prosecution as the two agencies that are needed to work in collaboration and cooperatively in the identification of crime and conviction of the perpetrators.

The police and the prosecution agencies 

The prosecutor plays a significant role in the criminal justice process. Apart from charging suspects, the prosecutor also makes a report detailing the specific crime being charged. The quality of the report is critical since it determines the outcome of the prosecution. Also, the prosecutor works with the investigator to further improve the preparation and the presentation of the case (Nkashe, 2015). The effective coordination between the prosecutor and the investigator supports the development of a quality report on evidence and consequently successful litigation. While exploring the role of the investigator and the prosecutor in the criminal justice systems, the current paper also looks at how the various stages of criminal justice systems contribute towards the attainment of a successful litigated outcome. Also, the author predicts and justifies the most probable change that will occur in the criminal justice system in the next 20 years.
The Role of the Prosecutor and the Police
The main role of the prosecutor in a criminal justice system is to make charges against a suspected criminal. After evaluating the preliminary evidence, the prosecutor determines whether or not to make criminal charges against an individual. In the event of enough evidence, the prosecutor files a formal report to charge the individual with a specific crime. The prosecutor continues with further research and preparation to obtain more evidence needed in convincing the jury that the said suspect is guilty (Davis, 2013). The prosecutor also has the role of presenting a plea bargain if there is a feeling that the jury is likely not to convict the suspect. The idea is to ensure that the suspect gets some punishment other than go scot-free. In the USA, the prosecutor is expected to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect is guilty, as such; the prosecution has the role of working in court to provide enough evidence needed to convince the jury that the suspect is guilty (Wright, 2017). The prosecutor is also allowed to recommend sentencing to the judge upon conviction of the suspect. In essence, the prosecution works for the government in the interest of the public to bring justice to accused criminals.
The investigator also plays a role in building a case for the prosecution. According to Hess & Orthmann (2016), the role of an investigator is to collect evidence to justify a criminal act as well as identifying and arresting suspects for the crime. The investigator can sketch or photograph the scene of a crime, obtain information from witnesses, search scenes of crime, and process physical evidence likely to link the suspects to the scene of a crime. Through the coordination of information from various sources, the investigator has a duty of making and presenting a detailed report containing information needed as evidence of the criminal act.
The investigator works in coordination with the prosecutor to prepare the case. The main role of the investigator is to prepare evidence and identify the suspects; however, the duty to place charges on the suspects rests with the prosecutor. Also, the prosecutor offers guidance to the investigator to ensure that the investigation process is done by the law while emphasizing the effectiveness of the investigation process. The authority of the prosecutor to control the prosecution process is in regard to the need to restore public confidence on the investigator and the desire to ensure that the investigations meet the standards of the rule of law (Neubauer & Fradella, 2015). The collected evidence is presented in the form of a report that is essential in building up the case. As much as the final report from the investigations carried out by both the prosecutor and the investigator does not qualify as evidence in a trial, they have a significant impact on the prosecution case (Davis, 2013). The report determines the charges that are placed by the prosecutor and also plays a major role in determining the suitable amount of bail that needs to be charged. The outcome of the preliminary hearings, the willingness of the prosecutor to consider a plea bargain is also influenced by the report. A poorly written report will lead to the placement of incorrect charges that are likely not to be convicted. Also, a poor quality report may lead to the prosecutor making unwise decisions most of which will not be accepted by the jury. As such, the quality of the report is important in supporting the prosecution process towards the attainment of a conviction.
The Criminal Justice Process
The criminal justice process undergoes different stages that assist in the building of the case and development of successful litigation. At the investigation stage, the prosecutor in coordination with the investigator generates the evidence needed to decide on whether to or not charge for a criminal act. In case that the evidence provided justifies the placement of a charge, the prosecutor will use the same evidence available to judge whether the crime is a felony or misdemeanor (Stelfox, 2013). Felony charges lead to an indictment, while a complaint is issued when the charge is a general crime (misdemeanor). New evidence is likely to be brought in during the trial phase of the criminal justice system. In jury trials, the jury will only listen to the evidence brought in the prosecution in making a determination of the case. However, the jury may call for additional witnesses to testify in court or order for new investigations the new evidence brought in at this stage leads to the development of the case. In a bench trial, the judges will give an opportunity for all the parties to make their arguments and the council to question the witnesses. More evidence is likely to be attained that will further support the development of the case towards the attainment of litigation. At the plea bargain stage evidence included in the prosecutor’s report is used to judge the most suitable charges against the defendant. The quality of the evidence determined the effectiveness of the prosecutor in setting a plea bargain that is likely to be accepted by the judges. If however, the case moves to the guilty plea stage, the prosecutor still uses the vast kinds of evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubts that the defendant committed the crimes as charged (Wright, 2017). The use of evidence in every stage of the criminal justice system is to ensure that justice is successfully achieved.
The quality of the evidence and the effectiveness of the prosecutor in presenting the same evidence determine whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the term. Poor investigation and submission of the evidence can lead to a verdict of “not guilty” and the defendant acquitted. According to Stelfox (2013) “not guilty” constitutes an acquittal. That is an acquittal follows the verdict of “not guilty”. The defendant is acquitted when the jury discovers that the prosecutor has failed to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt that. Nevertheless, it is not always that a verdict of “not guilty” will result in acquittal; the defendant may be found guilty of some charges leading to a partial acquittal. The improper investigations carried out by the investigator, and the prosecutor is considered the main cause of an acquittal. In most cases, the defendant is acquitted due to a lack of sufficient evidence. As much as the investigator is also involved in the collection of the evidence, the burden of proof lies with the prosecutor. Thus an acquittal means many failures on the prosecution as opposed to the investigator. It is the responsibility of the prosecutor to ensure enough and quality evidence is presented to the jury.
Predicted future changes in the criminal justice system
Advancement in technology and the increase in data is likely to be observed in the next 20 years. Investigators will be required to adopt new ways of information collection and synchronization. The investigators will not only use technological devices in the collection of data but will also acquire new gadgets that support the real-time transmission of evidence for recording. Gadgets for real-time language translation will be made available to make the collection of evidence easier. The social media platform will be vastly used as a source of information. The probable use of technological devices in criminal investigations will support the attainment of comprehensive and quality evidence needed in supporting the case until the attainment of litigation.
The prosecutor in coordination with the investor plays a significant role in collecting the evidence needed in supporting a criminal case. The quality of the evidence provided and the effectiveness of the prosecutor in placing charges and presenting the evidence to the court determine the attainment of successful litigation. The new evidence that is introduced at the various stages of the criminal justice process also supports the attainment of justice. It is predicted that there will be changes in the quantity of information and technological advancements. These changes will support the use of new sources of information and new technological devices to collect and synchronize data to avail quality evidence.

Nkashe, M. S. (2015). The role of the investigator in the prosecution process (Doctoral dissertation).
Davis, A. J. (2013). In search of racial justice: The role of the prosecutor. NYUJ Legis. & Pub. Poly, 16, 821
Wright, R. (2017). Prosecutor Institutions and Incentives. Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, 18(3).
Stelfox, P. (2013). Criminal investigation: An introduction to principles and practice. Routledge.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2015). America’s courts and the criminal justice system. Cengage Learning.
Hess, K. M., Orthmann, C. H., & Cho, H. L. (2016). Criminal investigation. Cengage Learning.