Posted on 08/20/2014 7:02:17 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Should the grand jury have been transparent or secretive --- concerning the evidence presented by the district attorney, etcetera?
Once again, we have a Travis County grand jury indicting yet another high-profile Republican. One was Tom Delay (then House Majority Leader from 2003 to 2005) and now presidential aspirant Rick Perry, governor of Texas.
The evidence that is presented is under the discretion of the district/prosecuting attorney. This attorney has strong control over the process and the room itself, and there is no one present to provide counter argument(s), and, finally, there is no judge present.
If you are a Republican and don't accept this scenario under which district/prosecuting attorneys can operate, then I guess you will have a problem with a secretive grand jury concerning the Michael Brown shooting; if you are a Democrat, then I guess you won't have a problem with a secretive grand jury concerning the Michael Brown shooting because you probably don't have a problem with a secretive grand jury concerning Rick Perry.
Yes, there are situations where secrecy is needed - i.e. where drug informants are involved. But politics can enter this situation, be it at a local community level or at a higher level. And with this in mind, these attorneys can take a situation and potentially say that it isn't their fault if the grand jury did not pass an indictment, even if they have discretion over the evidence presented.
Travis County is the ass of Texas.
And, as well, another kind of politics may be able to enter the fray, especially if these attorneys often work closely - almost hand-in-glove with the police.
Tom Delay, Rick Perry: grand jury indictments.
Michael Brown shot, and the black man who was reported to have been given a choke hold and died and a policeman was involved: both are going to grand juries.
I personally have believed for years now that secretive grand juries - in many cases and situations - leave much to be desired, regardless of the political party of the person involved, etc, etc.
then it wouldn’t be a grand jury, it would be a trial
You bet it was 100% “likely” commie ‘RAT voters.
Bingo.
We need less things going to grand juries. My position on this has been adamant for quite some time now.
Yes, there are some things that only a grand jury should take of (as I proffered above) but what if a district attorney has a beef with Republicans or likes to take situations involving police officers to grand juries, and situations involving civilians either directly to trial or not to trail at all?
Given Travis County is the venue for actions against the state of Texas and Texas officials, it seems logical that the DA and judges of Travis county should be subject to state wide election or appointed by the Governor.
Ew, would that make it Austin DT (District of Texas). Shudders...
It is largely populated with them too!
Better than the Peoples’ Republic of Travis County, which is how it is now.
Yes, grand jury proceedings should be secret. Those on the grand jury have the power not the D.A. If only they realized just HOW MUCH power they have ...
Please.
It is often said that “knowledge is power”, but how much power do they really have if a prosecuting attorney has discretion over which evidence is presented, no judge is present, no counter argument person is present, and the PA has strong control over the room?
Only situation involving drug informants and the like should go to grand juries. The rest - either take it directly to trial or don’t.
Wrong. A grand jury can call any witness they want and investigate any matter known to an individual grand jury member. They can tell the prosecutor to get bent. That they sit there like bumps on a log doing what they’re told is disgusting.
The grand jury exists to determine whether or not sufficient evidence exists to suggest that a crime has been committed. The place to hear “counter argument” is in a courtroom, under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, in front of a judge and jury, and in the presence of the defendant and his counsel. Presenting counter arguments in a grand jury proceeding would undo the entire purpose of grand jury proceedings.
Democrats holding fear card big time looking for new dirty trick book.
Wrong. There is no attorney present to provide a counter argument, as in a criminal trial, and the evidence presented is always under the discretion of the PA/DA, and the knowledge of the grand jury concerning what has transpired cannot be as broad or deep as the PA/DA.
Thus, there needs to be the rules changed concerning them. Ergo, either take this to trail or don’t so that the PA/DA cannot say that it’s not their fault if the grand jury tosses it. The buck should stop with the PA/DA.
Who said there was an attorney present to counter the prosecutor's arguments at a grand jury proceeding? I didn't. I said that would defeat the purpose of the proceedings.
and the evidence presented is always under the discretion of the PA/DA, and the knowledge of the grand jury concerning what has transpired cannot be as broad or deep as the PA/DA.
Respectfully, that's horsesh*t. The criminal code in Texas, which is pretty much the same as other states, is as follows:
Art. 20.09. DUTIES OF GRAND JURY. The grand jury shall inquire into all offenses liable to indictment of which any member may have knowledge, or of which they shall be informed by the attorney representing the State, or any other credible person.As I said, a grand jury is very powerful. And, yes, knowledge is power. If grand juries knew the extent of their power, they'd hear the evidence presented by the state and then exercise their full powers.
If a grand jury member knows about an offense or is made aware of an offense by a credible person, they can investigate it, which means they can subpoena and question witnesses - and not just the witnesses presented by the state but the witnesses they choose.
I recommend this article about the power of grand juries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.