Is that how it works? I thought if a victim wanted to press charges, then police process it and the process starts. I understand in some places the police won't let tourists / non-locals press charges against locals--effectively giving locals a carte blanche to abuse/assault/harass outsiders however they want with zero repercussions, an implicit impunity they nevertheless seem to understand and most definitely actively exploit sadly, tragically and abusively--particularly if, and exacerbated by, language barriers--i.e, if you're a non-local victimized by a local who doesn't speak their language in such a place, like Taiwan, the locals feel pretty confident no one can touch them (tho I haven't heard of that happening in the USA)...what's the prosecutor got to do with it? Isn't it a police decision?
> I thought if a victim wanted to press charges, then police process it and the process starts.
In the US, victims can’t press criminal charges; only the government can.
> what's the prosecutor got to do with it? Isn't it a police decision?
Usually, it’s both. Ideally, the prosecutor decides whether to prosecute, but if the police never pass information along to the prosecutor, the decision is effectively being made by the police.
I think you are correct but the DA office usually decides whether or not to proceed to court. It could be the DA has given the police "don't bother us with XYZ because we cannot go to court" and so the police don't bother either. Perhaps available jailspace is being triaged and that type of crime will ultimately be given a slap on the wrist so it's a waste of resources. I'm not in California but the news often has stories about California's jail overcrowding situation and having to early release criminals to make space.
