The initial intention of the prosecutor is to protect society, not just the individual victim. Prosecutors gain an unusual opportunity, through early and effective involvement, to put a stop to potential incidents of domestic violence. The verdict to proceed with the prosecution is not a choice of the victim, but of the prosecutor. Despite this, the pace of judicial proceedings is still governed by the reluctance of so many victims to participate in the judicial process. When victims cooperate, prosecutors are seven times more likely to prosecute (McCorkle, 2017). Most victims are reluctant to take part in the judicial process due to their personal goals of increasing safety, maintaining economic viability, protecting their children, or forcing the offender to participate in counseling the abuser. There are also some main elements that motivate victims to initiate judicial proceedings in their domestic violence cases, such as: curiosity about how the criminal justice system could help them meet their specific needs, confirmation of the long-standing concern that Prosecutors in domestic violence cases have a tendency to significantly limit the charges filed after police have handed out initial charges. Pro-arrest policies may have consumed prosecutors' offices, but research confirms “that prosecutors can dismiss or dismiss up to 80% of domestic violence cases” (McCorkle, 2017). Prosecutors tend not to take domestic violence cases seriously when numerous charges of battery and other specific domestic violence crimes are downgraded to standard regular assaults susceptible to judicial dismissal. The outcome of prosecutions of this nature has played a role in a “funnel effect” in which domestic violence cases are funneled out of the criminal justice system nullifying police charging behavior and ultimately undermining the position of favor of arrest.