U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Prosecutors Discover the Community

NCJ Number
187023
Journal
Judicature Volume: 84 Issue: 3 Dated: November-December 2000 Pages: 135-140
Author(s)
Brian Forst
Date Published
2000
Length
6 pages
Annotation
Community prosecution programs aim to connect the prosecutor more closely to the community, but as currently conceived, they do little either to make prosecutors more accountable to citizens or to promote a deep, transformational sense of justice.
Abstract
District attorneys from Boston and Brooklyn to Kansas City and Portland have launched programs of community outreach, assigning cases to assistant district attorneys by neighborhood rather than in the order they arrive, while encouraging the prosecutors to spend more time in the community. A common denominator is that the programs typically aim to redirect service outside the court, with more sensitivity to the cultures and special needs of those served. The fundamentals of prosecution, however, remain as they have for decades. The strongest evidence that interventions associated with community prosecution may reduce crime, especially cooperation between prosecutors and others in positions to prevent and solve crime, is from Boston. A constellation of projects are credited with reducing gun homicides in that city, especially among juveniles. A centerpiece of the Boston crime reduction efforts was the Safe Neighborhood Initiative (SNI), which coordinated law enforcement activities, supported neighborhood revitalization efforts, and complemented conventional response activities with a focus on prevention. SNI prosecutors spoke at all the local schools and at various community organization meetings. They also participated in the Boston Youth Violence Strike Force. In various projects, coordination among prosecutors provided an array of creative options in determining which charges to file where. Cross-deputization of prosecutors provided opportunities to file cases that fell under multiple jurisdiction authority. However, community prosecution efforts as a whole, including the Boston effort, have not been scientifically evaluated to determine where they are effective and where they fail to be cost-effective. As currently conceived, community prosecution programs do little either to make prosecutors more systematically accountable to citizens for their behind-the-scenes performance in all felony cases or to promote a transformational sense of justice. They may, in fact, divert the attention of prosecutors from reforms that could serve the community members most in need of relief from crime. 13 footnotes