THE POLICE AND THE PROSECUTOR HAVE A COMMON GOAL OF CATCHING AND PROSECUTING CRIMINALS. AT EACH POINT OF CONTACT DURING THE PROGRESS OF A CASE, THERE ARE POSSIBILITIES FOR FRICTION AND FOR COOPERATION. PROBLEMS ARISE FROM LACK OF PROSECUTORIAL CONTROL OVER QUALITY OF EVIDENCE AND FROM RESENTMENT CAUSED BY A DECISION NOT TO PROSECUTE. SUCH PROBLEMS MAY BE OVERCOME BY A REGULAR INTENSIVE DIALOGUE DURING ALL PHASES OF INTAKE AND SCREENING. PLEA NEGOTIATIONS ARE A PRIME SOURCE OF FRUSTRATION FOR THE POLICE. FOR CASES THAT GO TO TRIAL, POLICE AND PROSECUTORS FUNCTION AS A WELL COORDINATED TEAM WITH THE PROSECUTOR AS AN ADVOCATE AND THE POLICE AS THE CHIEF EXPERT WITNESSES. WHEN CHANGES IN THE LAW OCCUR, THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE FUNCTIONS AS ADVISOR TO POLICE REGARDING THE CHANGES IN SCOPE OF POWER OF BOTH POLICE AND THE PROSECUTOR AGENCIES. THE PROSECUTOR ALSO SERVES AS LEGAL ADVISOR IN EVIDENTIARY MATTERS. THE PROSECUTORS OFTEN PROVIDE FORMAL TRAINING OF POLICE, SENSITIZING POLICE TO PROSECUTION ISSUES. THE ORGANIZATIONAL PROBLEMS OF THE ROLES OF THE POLICE AND THE PROSECUTOR IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM ARISE FROM A PERCEIVED DIFFERENCE IN PROFESSIONAL AND SOCIAL STATUS. OFTEN POLICE AND PROSECUTORS ARE SEPARATED BY DIFFERENCES IN CAREER GOALS, MAINTENANCE OF IMPERSONAL CONTACTS, AND THE DIFFERENCES IN MEASURES OF EFFICIENCY. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. FOR RELATED DOCUMENTS SEE NCJ 69153, 69156, 69157, 69158, 69160 AND 69161.