Prosecutors’ decisions in common law jurisdictions remain understudied. Drawing on examples in Australian cases of child sexual abuse, this chapter provides insights into case attrition or advancement at the discretion of the prosecution. We discuss contextual factors that support this expanding area of prosecutorial practice, including legislation, available special measures for vulnerable complainants, and recommendations of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. We review factors that influence decisions on charges, whether a case proceeds, plea negotiation, jury versus judge-alone trials, and joint trials. These factors include the age difference between complainants and offenders, the time lapse between alleged offending and reporting, the quality of prerecorded interviews, and the amount of evidence. Recent research and developments affecting decisions by prosecutors about evidence by the complainant and expert witnesses in CSA trials are summarized. We conclude with suggestions for future research to expand understanding of the role of prosecutors’ decisions in this discrete area of criminal justice process.

Chapter 3 is the first of four chapters drawing on the original empirical data. It interrogates the issue of participation in CoP proceedings to argue that the CoP has failed to facilitate participation of the subject of proceedings, thereby undermining procedural justice and access to justice. Despite the rhetorical value placed on participation, the chapter shows that participation in CoP proceedings has not yet effectively been secured. An important distinction is drawn between direct and indirect participation, which is then used throughout the book to make a number of further arguments for reimagining the CoP. In addition, the chapter shows that the subject of CoP proceedings still rarely directly participates in them, despite some attempts at improvements. The chapter argues that direct participation is the ideal approach to ensure that procedural justice is secured, also briefly considering the ways that direct participation might be achieved in other types of case that do not reach a hearing. The second section of the chapter explores the reasons for limited participation, rejecting each of them as a sufficient justification for the current failure to secure participation. Finally, the chapter concludes with a number of recommendations for improving participation.