Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Little Star

(17,055 posts)
Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:09 PM Dec 2014

It’s time to get rid of grand juries

~snip~
Watching the gathering protests over the lack of indictments in Ferguson and New York City, I am struck by the call — not for a conviction — but for a trial, a chance to review and air the evidence. It is clear to me that the best possible reform that can come from these complex tragedies is not to create special proceedings for police officers — but to get rid of grand juries for everyone.

Not all killings are murder. There are good and important reasons that a police officer is given more legal authority to use lethal force than an average citizen. The problem in the recent cases is that prosecutors are failing to explain publicly and clearly why they do not want to prosecute the two police officers who have killed citizens. There very well could be compelling legal or factual reasons not to — and if those reasons exist, the prosecutor has every right not to bring charges. (In fact, under the law and the Constitution, a prosecutor should not bring charges if he or she believes that the evidence is flimsy or the case cannot be proved.)

In Ferguson and New York City, the grand jury appears to be a political cover for what otherwise could be a legitimate decision not to prosecute. Grand juries are designed to be able to indict ham sandwiches because typically the prosecutor presents only the best evidence, does not reveal exculpatory evidence, and the defendant is not even present to know who is or is not testifying against him.
~snip

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/12/05/ferguson-eric-garner-show-that-time-get-rid-grand-juries/qGDw7ci78rkrdNNbBpI4XM/story.html

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It’s time to get rid of grand juries (Original Post) Little Star Dec 2014 OP
Grand juries still serve a useful purpose, imo TexasMommaWithAHat Dec 2014 #1
Exactly what I have been saying Kalidurga Dec 2014 #2
England phased them out in the 1930s, and America is the only western country that still has them Electric Monk Dec 2014 #4
Where would those special prosecutors be found?... Little Star Dec 2014 #6
You can't realistically have a trial for every single crime davidn3600 Dec 2014 #3
A grand jury was how Rick Perry was indicted for abuse of power. True Blue Door Dec 2014 #5

TexasMommaWithAHat

(3,212 posts)
1. Grand juries still serve a useful purpose, imo
Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:17 PM
Dec 2014

It's not the grand jury that's the problem.

We need special prosecutors who aren't beholden to law enforcement.

 

Electric Monk

(13,869 posts)
4. England phased them out in the 1930s, and America is the only western country that still has them
Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:34 PM
Dec 2014

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and others have all quit using them. Especially when police are accused, there is simply way too much conflict of interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury

Little Star

(17,055 posts)
6. Where would those special prosecutors be found?...
Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:59 PM
Dec 2014

I doubt there are many who don't work hand and hand with law enforcement.

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
3. You can't realistically have a trial for every single crime
Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:32 PM
Dec 2014

The system would grind to a halt. Trials are very time-consuming and expensive to put on. Many jurisdictions would go bankrupt. That's ultimately the point of a grand jury was to filter out cases that don't have enough evidence to go to trial.

What do you do if you have a killing...just any random killing...and the victim's family is demanding justice. But the evidence is truly not there. You are not supposed to go to trial without probable cause. Someone must be empowered to make that determination. Judges, juries, prosecutors, politicians...are all subject to bias. Nothing will be foolproof because humans are not perfect beings.

Prosecutors don't have unlimited resources, so they are only interested in taking cases to trial that they feel they can win. If a case comes across their desk that they are unsure about, they either plea deal, take it to a grand jury to further assess/collect evidence, or drop the case entirely.

Now, does this lead to bias? Absolutely. The statistics do not lie... If you are a white, you have a higher probability to having the case against you dropped; have a higher probability of acquittal at trial; and you are likely to receive better plea deal offers. Also, if you are wealthy and/or a white female, you have a better chance of being given favorable bias.

The system has numerous biases involved. Justice is certainly not blind. But I am not aware of any other system that is better. Europeans have a different system but they frequently turn into circuses and go on forever (just ask Amanda Knox). They have their weaknesses too. We can argue and debate which justices systems around the world are better than others. But you are never going to achieve perfection no matter how long you protest in the streets. Human are simply not perfect creatures.

True Blue Door

(2,969 posts)
5. A grand jury was how Rick Perry was indicted for abuse of power.
Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:37 PM
Dec 2014

That was the only way to get around Texas's massive prosecutorial corruption.

It's a necessary tool.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»It’s time to get rid of g...