Replies

You sound like you know what you're talking about

IANAL, but the power of lawyers is such that one must learn something of them and their nefarious ways.

Can Grand Juries be held in secret?

Depends on the rules of criminal procedure. Under Federal law, the grand jurors, prosecutors, and presiding judge are sworn to secrecy. (There is no defence attorney at a GJ). Witnesses, generally not.

Here is an extract from the ABA FAQ for the media on Grand Juries.

Why are grand jury proceedings secret?
Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provide [sic] that the prosecutor, grand jurors, and the grand jury stenographer are prohibited from disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding. Secrecy was originally designed to protect the grand jurors from improper pressures. The modern justifications are to prevent the escape of people whose indictment may be contemplated, to ensure that the grand jury is free to deliberate without outside pressure, to prevent subornation of perjury or witness tampering prior to a subsequent trial, to encourage people with information about a crime to speak freely, and to protect the innocent accused from disclosure of the fact that he or she was under investigation.
Why can a grand jury witness talk about his or her testimony?
In the federal courts, the witness is not sworn to secrecy, and may disclose whatever he or she wishes to whomever he or she wishes. The witness exemption was adopted in part because it was thought that requiring witness secrecy was unrealistic and unenforceable, and in part to allow the witness to rebut rumors concerning his or her testimony. There is a basic revulsion in the United States about secret testimony.
Are there any other exceptions to grand jury secrecy?
At one time, the defendant in a criminal trial was never given access to the grand jury testimony that resulted in the indictment. By the 1980s, in most jurisdictions, if a witness who testified before the grand jury was called to testify at the eventual trial, the defendant was given a copy of that witness's grand jury testimony to use for possible impeachment. Some jurisdictions also give the defendant a list of everyone who testified before the grand jury, and several give the defendant a full transcript of all relevant grand jury testimony. In the federal system, no such list is provided, and the grand jury transcripts of only those persons who testify on behalf of the prosecutor at trial are given to the defendant.

I hope this answers your question. It does go some ways toward explaining how the old lawyer saying, "You could indict a tree [lamppost, fire hydrant, ham sandwich, etc.]," is true.

In practice, prosecutors are usualy larval-stage politicians, and are reluctant to bring a case unless there is some chance that they can win it; the only thing more deadening to a prosecutor's political ambition than a losing record is a loss in a high-profile case (see "Clarke, Marcia," et al.)

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F