Prosectors and judges

Prosecutors and Judges
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Prosecutors and Judges
Prosecutors are tasked with the responsibility of deciding if charges should be filed by evaluating the evidence presented before them. The judges, on the other hand, manage trails by considering the evidence beforehand. However, decisions from both parties can be influenced by factors that are beyond facts laid down in the evidence. For instance, public opinion comes into play when they are making various decisions (Cook, 2018). External pressure from the public exerts a lot of influence on prosecutors and judges since they need the community support to maintain their positions and bolster their legitimacy. More so, the public affects matters pertaining to capital punishment policy, the rate of incarceration as well as correctional expenditures. This is because, if the court expects the citizens to uphold the law and not take matters into their hands, then it has to ensure that justice prevails.
Moreover, it has also been proven that judges declare harsh sentencing if that is what the public demands especially at the end of their term (Boyd & Nelson, 2013). When a judge or prosecutor is deemed as soft on crime by the public, the probability of them being elected again is very low. This is because interest groups will hold campaigns against the reelection of such prosecutors and judges. At the state level, the public opinion really matters. Since the majority of these judges need voters to retain their positions in the judicial bench, they remain alert to the public opinion.

More so, the also try to create an electoral connection to maintain relevance. Elected prosecutors and judges are responsive to the public opinion because electoral defeat is determined by the actions they take.
References
Boyd, C., & Nelson, M. (2013). The Effects of Trial Judge Gender and Public Opinion on Criminal Sentencing Decisions. International Criminal Justice Review, 23(2), 1-25.
Cook, B. (2018). Public Opinion and Federal Judicial Policy. American Journal Of Political Science, 21(3), 567-600. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2110582