Decision Making In The Criminal Justice System

The exercise of discretion in the criminal justice system and related agencies often plays a key part in decisions which are made, but definitions of discretion are not clear, and despite widespread recognition of its importance there is much controversy on its nature and legitimacy. This book seeks to explore the importance of discretion to an understanding of the nature of the 'making of justice' in theory and practice, taking as its starting point the wide discretionary powers wielded by many of the key players in the criminal justice and related systems. It focuses on the core elements and contexts of discretion, looking at the power, ability, authority and duties of individuals, officials and organisations to decide, select or interpret vague standards, requirements or statutory uncertainties.

The study of decisions in the criminal justice process provides a useful focus for the examination of many fundamental aspects of criminal jus tice. These decisions are not always highly visible. They are made, or dinarily, within wide areas of discretion. The aims of the decisions are not always clear, and, indeed, the principal objectives of these decisions are often the subject of much debate. Usually they are not guided by explicit decision policies. Often the participants are unable to verbalize the basis for the selection of decision alternatives. Adequate information for the decisions is usually unavailable. Rarely can the decisions be demonstrated to be rational. By a rationaldecision we mean "that decision among those possible for the decisionmaker which, in the light of the information available, maximizes the probability of the achievement of the purpose of the decisionmaker in that specific and particular case" (Wilkins, 1974a: 70; also 1969). This definition, which stems from statistical decision theory, points to three fundamental characteristics of decisions. First, it is as sumed that a choice of possible decisions (or, more precisely, of possible alternatives) is available. If only one choice is possible, there is no de cision problem, and the question of rationality does not arise. Usually, of course, there will be a choice, even if the alternative is to decide not to decide-a choice that, of course, often has profound consequences.

This book offers a fresh perspective on the policy making process in the criminal justice system offering a detailed overview of both the theory behind it and how it plays out in practice with contemporary policy examples.