AN ARREST IN BRITAIN IS NOT THE SAME AS IN THE U.S.

Rebekah Brooks's arrest on Sunday thrust a former top newspaper official at News Corp. into the heart of a criminal investigation into dubious reporting tactics and alleged police corruption. But any charges she might face are likely weeks or months away—if charges are ever filed at all.
That is because the English legal system can use an arrest as an early step in a criminal investigation. That's a contrast to the U.S., where charges often follow closely on the heels of an arrest, experts say.
In Britain, an arrest is often an initial means of gathering evidence from a suspect before charges are brought.
Ms. Brooks was released without being charged around midnight on Sunday, after about 12 hours. A spokesman for Ms. Brooks said she is assisting police.
When Ms. Brooks was arrested Sunday, she formally moved to a suspect from a witness in the probe of phone-hacking and bribery allegations involving News International, the U.K. newspapers unit of News Corp. As a formal suspect she is guaranteed certain rights; in addition, the refusal to answer questions during her arrest can later be used against her if she later provides responses during a trial, according to legal experts.
Once people are questioned, any evidence will be put in the hands of the Crown Prosecution Service, which prosecutes criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales, and which will decide what the charges, if any, are brought.
Police and prosecutors will be looking at what did she actually know? And was she negligent in her oversight of what was going on? But she almost certainly won't be charged at this stage, one source said.
As of Sunday, it was still possible that she would appear before a parliamentary committee on Tuesday for a hearing on the case. If she is charged, however, she wouldn't be able to give public evidence because it could prejudice the trial.
Also unlike the U.S., the U.K. doesn't formally use plea bargaining when it comes to charges, with rare exceptions, legal experts say. It can be invoked when it comes to sentencing, although usually informally, they said. This could limit the ability of prosecutors to extract information on other News Corp. executives from Ms. Brooks since they cannot offer her leniency in exchange, legal experts say.
Conversely, Ms. Brooks will be less able to shield herself from serious charges in exchange for cooperation, a common practice in the U.S.
Generally it is up to the prosecution to decide charges. "It is not something she can negotiate—it is out of her hands.
News Corp. also owns The Wall Street Journal.