Of course, the cost of all this attention must be satisfied through the expenditure of resources, and a law which becomes too costly, given its relative priority, is a law which is soon abandoned. It is axiomatic that no agency has sufficient resources to give quality attention to all of its charges. Therefore, if ARPA is to be a viable tool, it must find life within existing resources. If one assumes that the quintessential ARPA case will be brought to court with little preparation, which is an unrealistic assumption in any criminal case, and that an archaeologist working alone may submit credible testimony to satisfy the appropriate legal elements, the case may still falter in the legal process before it is resolved. It would be appropriate to assume that the purpose of an investment in ARPA prosecution is to realize success in court and to achieve through successful resolution the deterrence of site destruction, or at the least, retribution.
Preparation is key to the successful litigation of any case.
Each player must be knowledgeable not only in the unique skill they bring to the team, but also in the role they play within the team. Each member may have an ongoing role in site protection but the focus here is on the part each team member assumes in the preparation of an ARPA case for trial. The respective functions begin with the reporting of a violation and continue through the investigation, preparation for court, and trial. As such, they most likely will be involved in the reporting of violations when involved in field work. It is their obligation to know of the law enforcement agency having responsibility for a site regardless of whether a disturbance has occurred.