I've never understood why so many defense attorneys view taking a case to trial as a "threat" against the prosecution. As a prosecutor, I love jury trials. It's why I took this gig in the first place.Yes. I think the jury trial are usually the part of the job which fires up people on both sides of the aisle. But they come do come with a price and I think that's what the "threat" is about.
I think the "threat" most often thought of is that it clogs the docket (which the prosecutor and the judge have responsibility for, not the defendant) and is a lot of work and time for a prosecutor who has more serious cases to handle and really doesn't want to spend the time needed to prep a jury trial on an uttering case (or larceny or simple possession or any of a litany of minor felonies). This is a more realistic threat in areas where there are greater crime rates and more serious crimes. It doesn't work in places where there 100 or so felonies in an entire year.
In more serious crimes the "threat" probably goes more like this:
(1) Your boss is an elected official. I'm not.Of course, most people have enough sense not to say any of this out loud because it is the surest way to make sure the prosecutor won't deal. However, it's always in the background, an unstated part of the conversation.
(2) You're supposed to win in the courtroom. I'm not.
(3) If you lose it's potentially newsworthy. If I lose nothing more happens then was expected.
(4) If your office persists in refusing to make rational deals and loses a number of times it definitely becomes newsworthy.
(5) With 3 & 4 in mind I point you back to #1.