Grand Juries.

[Blues Man]

I have always had a problem with the idea of "secret " court proceedings and I will always be skeptical of any grand Jury rulings for a lot of reasons.

The GJ is a secret hearing that delivers a secret verdict
The GJ is a prosecutor's tool and the person being accused has no representation
The rules of evidence do not apply so the prosecutor is free to use illegally obtained evidence and hearsay
The prosecutor is relying on a pool of people who know nothing about the law to decide if there is enough evidence to indict.

Tell me why does a lawyer have to ask the opinion of a public pool of people who know Jack Shit about the law if he has enough evidence to file charges?

It is a tool used to guarantee an indictment AND it also puts it out there h=that one jury already found a defendant "guilty" of something.

 

[WinterBorn]

I have always had a problem with the idea of "secret " court proceedings and I will always be skeptical of any grand Jury rulings for a lot of reasons.

The GJ is a secret hearing that delivers a secret verdict
The GJ is a prosecutor's tool and the person being accused has no representation
The rules of evidence do not apply so the prosecutor is free to use illegally obtained evidence and hearsay
The prosecutor is relying on a pool of people who know nothing about the law to decide if there is enough evidence to indict.

Tell me why does a lawyer have to ask the opinion of a public pool of people who know Jack Shit about the law if he has enough evidence to file charges?

It is a tool used to guarantee an indictment AND it also puts it out there h=that one jury already found a defendant "guilty" of something.

It is also not a trial. Yes, there are different rules. IN an actual trial, the results will determine sentencing. In a grand jury indictment, they are only determining whether to bring it to trial.

 

[Blues Man]

It is also not a trial. Yes, there are different rules. IN an actual trial, the results will determine sentencing. In a grand jury indictment, they are only determining whether to bring it to trial.

Why does the opinion of people who do not know the law matter in weighing evidence? Shouldn't a prosecutor know this because of his education and supposed knowledge of the law?

The prosecutor can use any tainted evidence he wants even evidence he knows will be thrown out by the court

Why do we condone secret court proceedings ?