USES OF THE ANALYTICAL MODEL
In this book I have attempted to show that there is a basic structure underlying the criminal procedural systems of four widely differing societies in the world today. In chapter 2 I argued that this similarity in structure is the result of a historical development which combined elements of two prior, philosophically opposed, systems--one emphasizing retributive (or substantive) justice and the other distributive (or procedural) justice. The first tends to have procedures which efficiently separate the wheat from the chaff as far as prosecutable and unprosecutable cases are concerned, which then ruthlessly, but still (for the most part) honestly, seek the truth of the matter through investigation and interrogation, which impose sentences mainly designed instrumentally to reduce the level of crime and restore the offender to his former place in society or isolate him from it, and which finally provide back-up to correct error in the form of appeals to higher authorities. The second views the criminal action essentially as a private dispute, which is litigated in a way which is likely to produce the maximum satisfaction for the persons who use it by fairly distributing favorable outcomes between them. This type of system is likely to emphasize procedure over substance and to transform the proceeding into a kind of game in which the litigants are players who use the law (especially procedural rules and rights) tactically to gain advantage or to act as a bargaining chip in the disposition of the case.