It don’t mean nothing. Go to bed now...
these citizen’s grand juries are ridiculous
sort of like those people creating their own ids and resigning from the country
no real authority
Old news. Sorry to say it’s grandstanding. I hope both she and BDLR get Nifonged. I’m sure here’s a Micky D someplace that needs burger flippers. On second thought, burger flippers have more talent and deserve more credit than the two slime mates.
I declare myself King of Delaware.
It holds the same weight.
I want to know when our law enforcement is going to follow up on all the death threats.
Conspiracy to commit murder is a felony.
Nah, we just need to wait for the British press, they'll cover it.
I fear that an attempt is being made to bring this entire matter back to square one and begin again the prosecution of Zimmerman.
Was there ever an OFFICIAL grand jury to whom this evidence was introduced, prior to making the indictment against George Zimmerman? Apparently not, as the indictment was brought by Angela Corey based on what was essentially hearsay evidence, and bypassing the grand jury altogether.
It has always been popularly supposed (particularly by those on the left) that a grand jury could return an indictment against a ham sandwich, if that was the outcome desired.
But given the weakness of the case, even this low standard was more than the grand jury could be trusted with.
Under Florida law, a certain degree of prosecutorial discretion is allowed, but not when there is potential for sentence for commission of a capital crime. Manslaughter would not be necessarily subject to grand jury review, but almost certainly, second-degree murder should have been beyond the discretion of the prosecutor.
Larry Klayman, nuff said.
Carries about as much weight as a Congressional contempt citation.
Congratulations!
You have just posted more ammunition for the left who like to point at posts like yours as evidence that we are a bunch of kooks.
This kind of whack-jobbery makes all of Free Republic look like a bunch of ass clowns.
This is as important as my belief that Obama should be thrown out of the White House as a commie-pinko fag, or that Holder should be jailed along with the leadership of the IRS.
Citizen’s Grand Jury = guys drinking beer in my living room while complaining. Please don’t post stuff that looks real in the title but has no basis in reality.
These posts and articles about “citizens grand juries” drive me nuts. So patently unrealistic.
Actually, while citizen grand juries don’t have force of law right now, they ring a peculiar note with the judiciary.
“A grand jury is not an arm of the court but “is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside.
“Grand juries perform both accusatory and investigatory functions. In the early decades of the United States citizen grand juries played a major role in public matters.
“Any citizen could bring a matter before a grand jury directly, from a public work that needed repair, to the delinquent conduct of a public official, to a complaint of a crime, and grand juries could conduct their own investigations.
“In that era most criminal prosecutions were conducted by private parties, either a law enforcement officer, a lawyer hired by a crime victim or his family, or even by a laymen.
“A layman could bring a bill of indictment to the grand jury; if the grand jury found there was sufficient evidence for a trial, that the act was a crime under law, and that the court had jurisdiction, it would return the indictment to the complainant.
“The grand jury would then appoint the complaining party to exercise the authority of an attorney general, that is, one having a general power of attorney to represent the state in the case. The grand jury served to screen out incompetent or malicious prosecutions.
“The advent of official public prosecutors in the later decades of the 19th century largely displaced private prosecutions.”
This last sentence is very important.
That is, modern grand juries have only been around for about 130 years. This means there is a huge amount of judicial precedent for citizen grand juries.
‘Stare decisis’ is a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedent established by prior decisions. In practice this means that they show deference or at least consideration to the law, even as it was written before it was changed as public policy.
This sometimes figures into other aspects of court hearings, such as judges giving wide latitude to criminal defendants who decide to defend themselves instead of hiring a lawyer.
So what does this mean? If states decided to legitimize citizen grand juries, they could do so by mandating that if such a citizen grand jury reached a decision that could result in an indictment, that they could hire an advocate to present that information to a modern grand jury, whether or not a prosecutor wanted to present that evidence.
Prosecutors are often thought to have far too much power to determine who grand juries prosecute and who they do not, often for political reasons. And this would be a way for the citizenry to go over his head, and obtain a legal indictment whether he wanted to or not.
And a lot of judges would respect that.
The perfect irony would be one of the racially whipped up black drive-by thugs ending her career in her driveway, not knowing she is the filth that instigated the racial crap.