Reconfigured police-prosecutor relationships in the era of the Progressive Prosecution movement

• In Event: Prosecution in the Making III: Prosecutors as Court Actors

Abstract

The “Progressive Prosecution Movement” (PPM) holds implications for the relationships among criminal legal system stakeholders. In the Philadelphia context, PPM reform efforts like policy declination, investigating police misconduct, prioritizing conviction integrity, and enforcing due process standards around the quality of evidence will likely have implications for the police-prosecutor relationship. Traditionally, role orientations among the police and prosecutors have been complementary, with police assuming a “warrior” role and prosecutors as “advocates.” Within the context of the courtroom workgroup, it is often assumed that prosecutors act as extensions of the police. Of particular interest for this study is how shifting orientation and goals impact the police-prosecutor relationship. Qualitative analysis of interviews with police officers (n = 8) and prosecutors (n = 63) revealed four overarching themes: (1) occupational goals and views about justice and crime control, (2) collaboration and communication, (3) trust and accountability, and (4) discretionary power and community concerns. Findings show how shifting relationships may impede some PPM reform efforts while also considering that transforming relationship dynamics may be an ultimate goal. Further, changes in the relationships suggest that the traditional view of the courtroom workgroup may be outdated and should be expanded to a systems workgroup.

Authors

• Megan E. Mohler, Temple University

• Luis C. Torres, Temple University

• Jesse Brey, Temple University

• Jeffrey T. Ward, Temple University

• E. Rely Vilcica, Temple University