As I wrote, I don’t think such a number should be set directly by law.
A judge can however take the number into account when deciding whether there’s “probable cause”. Individual jurors might also decide to categorically treat charges with are under some number as baseless charges.
A voter might decide that he doesn’t want to reelect prosecutors that fill charges with <50% or <75% certainty. Prosecutors who fill charges that they believe to be low probability can be judged for that behavior democratically and different voters can disagree with each other what standards they have for prosecutors.
Having new dimensions based on which voters can evaluate prosecutors and thus incentvise different behavior for prosecutors then just a maximum of convictions is part of the point.
As I wrote, I don’t think such a number should be set directly by law.
A judge can however take the number into account when deciding whether there’s “probable cause”. Individual jurors might also decide to categorically treat charges with are under some number as baseless charges.
A voter might decide that he doesn’t want to reelect prosecutors that fill charges with <50% or <75% certainty. Prosecutors who fill charges that they believe to be low probability can be judged for that behavior democratically and different voters can disagree with each other what standards they have for prosecutors.
Having new dimensions based on which voters can evaluate prosecutors and thus incentvise different behavior for prosecutors then just a maximum of convictions is part of the point.