ABSTRACT
Conventional explanations for the development of the crown prosecution service (CPS) and juvenile liaison procedures can be traced to the argument that the traditional police role and skills in investigating crime are incompatible with the objectivity required in prosecution. All cases which are either charged or reported for summons are subject to review both within the police and by the CPS. The system of routinized decion making is dominated throughout its stages by the interests and values of the police, with the CPS playing an essentially subordinate and reactive role. Where juvenile procedures are operated the police maintain their dominant role, by reserving the power to disregard and overrule any recommendation from the liaison procedure, and by exercising control over the discourse of the procedure. The function of juvenile is supposed to be to consider the most appropriate disposal in the public interest.
