Want this question answered?
As a private individual you cannot 'file' criminal charges against anyone. You can attempt to bring the facts to the attention of the prosecutor's superiors - if you can present enough proof, perhaps they will institute a charge of perjury. HOWEVER you can file a civil suit against the prosecutor for false or malicious prosecution.
No, only the prosecutor.
During a Grand Jury proceeding, the prosecutor isn't required to present all evidence in his possession. He needs to present enough to convince the jurors that there is enough evidence for an indictment.
IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A CRIMINAL CASE - If the police officer(s) were able to present sufficient proof to the prosecutor to merit and sustain the charge, the case COULD still go forward. The complainant would be subpoenad to the next hearing. -OR- the prosecutor could Nolle the charge with an explanation of 'lack of prosecution.'
The institution and continuance of a criminal suit involving the process of pursuing formal charges against an offender to final judgment source: Webster's dictionary
Yes, a prosecutor reviews misdemeanor charges. It is the responsibility of the prosecutor to decide whether there is enough evidence to pursue a conviction and whether it is in the best interest of the public to proceed with a case.
The judge - The clerk of the court - a court stenographer - the defendant - the defense attorney (and any assistants) - the prosecutor (and any assistants) - the court Bailiff (one or more) - The jury - any onlookers - and (as they are called, one-at-a-time) the witnesses for both sides.
The role of the prosecutor - is to outline the charges and present the evidence against the defendant.
It depends on WHO says it lacks evidence.The defense attorney is ALWAYS going to claim that the prosecution lacks sufficient evidence to convict their client.If the judge dismisses the case due to lack of evidence then the prosecutor didn't build a proper foundation for their case. In the end it comes down to the prosecutor who decides if they have enough evidence to proceed with prosecution or not.If a prosecutor decides that law enforcement failed to present them with enough to work with they will Nolle Prossea case before it ever even gets to court.
In a Criminal Trial, you have a Prosecutor and Defendant. The prosecutor's job is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. In a Civil Trial, you have a Plaintiff and a Defendant. The plaintiff's jog is to present the preponderance of the evidence. Both can be jury trials. The bar is lower for the defendant in the Criminal trial. He can demand a jury trial and get it in most situations. Beyond a reasonable doubt means almost certain. Preponderance of evidence means the evidence on the side of the plaintiff is a whole lot stronger than that on the side of the defendant. Still, what a jury will decide and award one party is frequently simply a guess. It can differ quit a bit from theory.
Not in person. She should speak with the prosecutor handling the prosecution of the case. ONLY the prosecutor gets to decide what they will present to a Grand Jury in order to gain an indictment.
Often the prosecutor would call before court to determine how best to question the victim and to determine how the victim will present themselves in court. The prosecutor might also call to get the victim's input on a plea bargain or settlement offer. Since the prosecutor is representing the interest of the victim, they may wish to talk for any number of reasons.