To: Jarhead1957
Some of your better people are put on Grand Juries. But the real truth is a Grand Jury hears only one side and must make a decision only about probable cause.
I have never known a Grand Jury to No Bill anything that the Solicitor or prosecuting attorney wanted an indictment on and I watched the system operate for 30 years and have personally appeared before a Grand Jury on hundreds of occasions. For those of you who have never been on a Grand Jury or for those who are not familiar with the system a Grand Jury is a formality and a rubber stamp.
14 posted on
09/30/2005 8:08:13 AM PDT by
gunnedah
To: gunnedah
I worked in a DA's office for ten years, and you are right, but I have seen some real slugs on Grand Juries.
It depends on how they are chosen.
24 posted on
09/30/2005 8:20:19 AM PDT by
Jarhead1957
(Semper Fi)
To: gunnedah
I read here that Earle went to SIX grand juries before he got the indictment. Anyone know anything about that?
To: gunnedah
For those of you who have never been on a Grand Jury or for those who are not familiar with the system a Grand Jury is a formality and a rubber stamp. Does seem strange that it took five grand juries to find one that could be convinced to indite. That is four more than it takes to indite a ham sandwich.
28 posted on
09/30/2005 8:25:18 AM PDT by
River_Wrangler
(You can't be lost if you don't care where you're at !)
To: gunnedah
Some of your better people are put on Grand Juries.Really? I don't know ANYBODY who's not retired who could afford to take six weeks off work to sit on a Grand Jury.
IOW, only people with lots of time on their hands seem to end up on them.
60 posted on
09/30/2005 11:10:58 AM PDT by
sinkspur
(Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson