Differences In Conviction Rates

Elections should deviate from relying on conviction rates because these fail to account for prosecutorial misconduct and if their strategies have reduced crime.Chief Prosecutor elections operate similarly to normal elections in the fact that the candidates rather attack themselves than to discuss their proposals. The discussion found in campaigns for chief prosecutor elections fail to produce substantive information for the citizens. Instead of explaining their proposals to the electorate, research demonstrates candidates focus on personal integrity and misconduct, moving beyond professional training or experience to other conduct that might damage the moral character of the candidate ( 602). These tactics produce misinformation that spillovers into faulty criminal justice policy and perhaps even longer terms in office for certain prosecutors. Considering the high percentage of reelection for incumbent chief prosecutors ( 85 percent), the current campaigns …show more content…
Attorneys rely on their work reputation to receive specific clients and cases. This reputation, however, can be tainted by running against a coworker. The data from prosecutorial elections demonstrates that “ fifty-four contested general elections… about 20% of them worked in the incumbent's office at the time of the election… In this setting, a challenger who runs against the incumbent and loses will pay a price well beyond election day. The prosecutor who unsuccessfully tries to unseat the boss will likely have to leave the office and find new employment ” ( Wright 604 BEYOND). Aware of the slight chances of their victory, many potential candidates conclude their cost-benefit analysis of running in chief prosecutor elections are not beneficial because a loss in this elections can taint their previous accomplishments as