IN ASSOCIATION WITH EXPECTATIONS FOR CRIMINAL COURTS, THERE IS A GROWING BODY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE DATA SHOWING THAT CRIMINAL COURTS ARE NOT MEETING EVALUATIVE CRITERIA OF STRICT LEGALITY (DUE PROCESS MODEL), SOCIAL CONTROL (CITIZEN PROTECTION MODEL), AND SOCIAL SERVICE (REHABILITATION MODEL). THESE EXPECTATIONS CONSTITUTE 'WISHFUL THINKING' IN THE MIDST OF THE BUILT-IN LIMITATIONS AND PROBLEMS OF CRIMINAL COURTS. SOCIAL SCIENCE, IF IT IS TO BE MOST USEFUL IN COURT REFORM, MUST DERIVE ITS MEASUREMENT CRITERIA FROM REALISTIC POSSIBILITIES FOR COURT PERFORMANCE. THIS WILL REQUIRE CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS IN CRIMINAL COURTS AND A WILLINGNESS TO VIEW EVENTS THROUGH THE EYES OF THE PRINCIPAL ACTORS. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT ALL EXTERNAL CONSTRAINTS OR EXPECTATIONS ARE INAPPROPRIATE. HOWEVER, IT DOES MEAN THAT THOSE EXPECTATIONS MUST REFLECT AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF WHAT COURTS DO AND THE MOTIVES AND INTERESTS OF THE ACTORS. THE OPERATION OF CRIMINAL COURTS IS TAILORED TO PROVIDE A FORUM FOR COMPETING PERSPECTIVES OF AN INCIDENT BELIEVED RELATED TO A SPECIFIC LAW OR LAWS. THE RESULT IS GENERALLY INADEQUATE WHEN MEASURED BY THE HIGH EXPECTATIONS OF LEGAL STRICTNESS, SOCIAL CONTROL, AND OFFENDER REHABILITATION; HOWEVER, IT IS USUALLY APPROPRIATE, GIVEN THE OFFENSE, THE OFFENDER, AND THE LIMITS OF INFORMATION AND TIME WITH WHICH CRIMINAL COURTS MUST COPE. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)