Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does the Fifth Amendment Grand-Jury Protection Still Matter?
National Review ^ | November 26, 2014 | By Andrew C. McCarthy

Posted on 11/26/2014 1:38:31 PM PST by Jim Robinson

A number of commentators have argued tonight, with no challenge by their media interviewers, that even if the evidence was insufficient to indict Officer Darren Wilson, justice would have been better served if the grand jury had indicted anyway. That way, the reasoning goes, we could have had a public trial in the light of day where everyone could have seen that the case was insufficient. That, we are to believe, would have made it easier for the community to accept the result.

The interests of the community, however, are not the only ones in the equation, much less the most important ones. What about the interests of the suspect? Those are the interests the Constitution addresses.

The Fifth Amendment states: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury.”

The Constitution does not consider the grand jury to be a rubber stamp. It is a core protection. It stands as the buffer between the government prosecutor and the citizen-suspect; it safeguards Americans, who are presumed innocent, from being subjected to the anxiety, infamy and expense of a trial unless there is probable cause to believe they have committed a serious offense.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 5thamendment; darrenwilson; ferguson; fergusongj; grandjury
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-57 next last

1 posted on 11/26/2014 1:38:32 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
it safeguards Americans, who are presumed innocent, from being subjected to the anxiety, infamy and expense of a trial unless there is probable cause to believe they have committed a serious offense.

As a general rule, exactly right.

In the case of Officer Wilson, he's already being subjected to the maximum possible anxiety, infamy and expense.

So it's difficult to see how skipping a trial helps him much.

2 posted on 11/26/2014 1:43:59 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

If there were an indictment and subsequent trial, Mike Brown’s attorneys would twist and spin everything, with the MSM support, and make a worse situation than what occurred. The prosecutor turning evidence over to a grand jury was the correct thing to do, in order to have a fair outcome for all.


3 posted on 11/26/2014 1:44:34 PM PST by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first — verdict afterwards.’

‘Stuff and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. ‘The idea of having the sentence first!’

‘Hold your tongue!’ said the Queen, turning purple.

‘I won’t!’ said Alice.

‘Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.


WELCOME TO WONDERLAND! Enjoy your stay.


4 posted on 11/26/2014 1:46:19 PM PST by Nervous Tick (There is no "allah" but satan, and mohammed is his demon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I rather doubt an indictment, followed by a trial and then an acquittal would appease people who are acting purely on emotion, people who have abandoned reason.


5 posted on 11/26/2014 1:46:29 PM PST by Allynnova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

This was coming from attorney Crump who NEEDED an indictment to sustain a civil suit. A civil suit and probable cause have fairly close standards of proof.

Without the probable cause finding the civil suit circus is over before it started. This means CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC’s jobs are at an end here. This means no more brown family t-shirt sales.

This means no money for shaprton’s brawley II media frenzy.

“some say” is just code for reporters left wing mind view.

The PHYSICAL evidence suggests that of a thug who could not control himself and assaulted a uniformed police officer.


6 posted on 11/26/2014 1:47:28 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

The media indicted him, not the facts and evidence, which proved Wilson innocent of media and liars’ claims.


7 posted on 11/26/2014 1:48:33 PM PST by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
if the evidence was insufficient to indict Officer Darren Wilson, justice would have been better served if the grand jury had indicted anyway

No, perverting justice can not serve justice.

8 posted on 11/26/2014 1:49:15 PM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Oh, for crying out loud. The police officer committed no crime. His constitutional rights are guaranteed and should not be trampled!


9 posted on 11/26/2014 1:50:06 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
justice would have been better served if the grand jury had indicted anyway. That way, the reasoning goes, we could have had a public trial in the light of day where everyone could have seen that the case was insufficient.

it worked out so well for the first Rodney King trial.....

10 posted on 11/26/2014 1:50:08 PM PST by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Actual laws no longer matter.
It’s now “feelings” and crap like that.


11 posted on 11/26/2014 1:51:30 PM PST by humblegunner (Why hello, Captain Trips.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
In the case of Officer Wilson, he's already being subjected to the maximum possible anxiety, infamy and expense.

So it's difficult to see how skipping a trial helps him much.

He avoids the risk of decades in prison. That seems pretty helpful.

12 posted on 11/26/2014 1:52:17 PM PST by Ken H (What happens on the internet stays on the internet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
If a grand jury can not find a reason to indict, there is no reason to go through an expensive trial.

13 posted on 11/26/2014 1:53:18 PM PST by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
A civil suit and probable cause have fairly close standards of proof.

Criminal trial: "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Civil suit: "preponderance of the evidence."

At least, that's what I recall from the OJ civil case brought by the parents of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. True in California, at any rate.

14 posted on 11/26/2014 2:03:10 PM PST by Steely Tom (Thank you for self-censoring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BitWielder1

Some reasons:

Totally intimidate all LEO with a long, drawn-out trial that discusses their vulnerabilities for hours/day over months

Provide ready-made programming for network news for months

Destroy the police officer’s life with smears, allegations, what-ifs, memes, hashtags, t-shirts that will live on after the trial is concluded

Allow rioting no matter what the verdict

Enrich a select group of lawyers

Establish precedent to seek damages from municipal police departments

Destroy Constitutional protections for whites in any case involving non-whites.

Not necessarily in that order and not limited to the above.


15 posted on 11/26/2014 2:05:09 PM PST by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

No disagreement, sir. I was merely noting that in his case not standing trial is not going to shield him from the infamy, etc. mentioned as the reasons for requiring a grand jury indictment before trial.

IOW, in his case, as in Zimmerman’s, a very large percentage of the population, and almost all of the media, have already convicted him anyway.


16 posted on 11/26/2014 2:05:22 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

We don’t negotiate for our God-given freedom. Ever!!


17 posted on 11/26/2014 2:07:29 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

If there was insufficient evidence to justify holding a trial, there was presumably little chance of his being convicted.

If there is evidence for a potential conviction, then the GJ should have indicted.

All I’m saying is that in his case the grand jury protection has failed, largely because the media did not do their job.


18 posted on 11/26/2014 2:09:13 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

B/S. He’s constitutionally protected from a lynch mob! Deal with it.


19 posted on 11/26/2014 2:15:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
In the case of Officer Wilson, he's already being subjected to the maximum possible anxiety, infamy and expense.

He's a veritable martyr ... to DUTY

I feel a Poem coming on ...


20 posted on 11/26/2014 2:16:44 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-57 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson