General Discussion

pipoman

(16,038 posts)

3. Grand juries are not public.

Wed Nov 26, 2014, 09:08 PM

Nov 2014

Some evidence presented to grand juries isn't admissible in a criminal case. The process is designed to be a sort of mediator in cases exactly like this one. The prosecutor saw no cause so rather than subjective dismissal sent it to a grand jury to determine. That grand jury found no criminal intent or laws violated either.

So no, grand juries must stay and remain private. ..not secret, members of the public were present, they're just not supposed to disclose the information.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Shadow Trial: Prosecutors in Ferguson violated our right to an open criminal justice system. [View all] justiceischeap Nov 2014 OP

Secretive, occult dealings are not justice csziggy Nov 2014 #1

I'm convinced that a trial would have done that community and many others a world of good justiceischeap Nov 2014 #2

Exactly - hiding the evidence has angered people as much as the shooting did csziggy Nov 2014 #4

Out in the open? There hasn't been a more transparent grand jury ever JonLP24 Nov 2014 #48

During the process all we had were selected leads csziggy Nov 2014 #49

Pretty much all grand jury proceedings are closed to the public JonLP24 Nov 2014 #50

I'm talking about the legal requirement of closed grand jury proceedings csziggy Nov 2014 #53

Grand juries are usually required to secret by law JonLP24 Nov 2014 #54

I meant to say "I'm NOT talking about the legal requirement of closed grand jury proceedings" csziggy Nov 2014 #55

Grand juries are not public. pipoman Nov 2014 #3

Sure, sure... if that helps you sleep better at night. justiceischeap Nov 2014 #5

I suspect he knew what the grand jury determined... pipoman Nov 2014 #8

Can you say with 100% certainty that he actually presented all the evidence to the grand jury? justiceischeap Nov 2014 #11

I trust that the grand jury heard the evidence pipoman Nov 2014 #16

Wilson, the Defendant here, was never cross examined. woolldog Nov 2014 #18

Not extraordinary or unbelievable or rare or even unusual in a grand jury proceeding. .. pipoman Nov 2014 #21

Um, yes it is. woolldog Nov 2014 #22

By whom? pipoman Nov 2014 #23

By whom? woolldog Nov 2014 #24

So he was questioned by the prosecutor? pipoman Nov 2014 #25

Yes. woolldog Nov 2014 #26

So let me make sure I have this right.... pipoman Nov 2014 #27

He conducted it as if it were a direct exam. woolldog Nov 2014 #28

Isn't it a direct examination by definition? pipoman Nov 2014 #29

He's the Defendant in the proceeding, which is captioned Missouri v. Wilson woolldog Nov 2014 #33

The defendant can always be called in a gj case pipoman Nov 2014 #35

You are completely missing the point. woolldog Nov 2014 #37

I don't believe it matters pipoman Nov 2014 #41

In other words: woolldog Nov 2014 #44

I'm not defending anything, pipoman Nov 2014 #45

Of course you are. woolldog Nov 2014 #46

Keep lying to yourself if you wish. .. pipoman Nov 2014 #47

Seriously? Again, you are wrong. woolldog Nov 2014 #52

What felony? Try "alleged" (if you can identify death penalty level felony). nt IdaBriggs Nov 2014 #17

Yes, if person 'a' runs out of a bank with alarms sounding, with a bag of money, pipoman Nov 2014 #19

Nice strawman rufus dog Nov 2014 #31

yep pipoman Nov 2014 #36

Is jaywalking now a felony? rufus dog Nov 2014 #30

Assaulting/battering a police officer is a felony pipoman Nov 2014 #32

again you got nothing rufus dog Nov 2014 #34

See, the cop gets to be the aggressor, it's his job pipoman Nov 2014 #38

Wrong rufus dog Nov 2014 #39

Have you read the transcripts? pipoman Nov 2014 #40

are you referring to the part about Wilson rufus dog Nov 2014 #43

Give up with that one. Not worth it. He's so fucking transparent. morningfog Nov 2014 #51

Someone asked me to point to what I consider open racism KitSileya Nov 2014 #57

Help him sleep? More like a wet dream. morningfog Nov 2014 #15

The whole point is that a grand jury was not the best way to handle this csziggy Nov 2014 #6

It followed Missouri criminal procedure, and again pipoman Nov 2014 #10

Michael Baden wasn't allowed to testify aint_no_life_nowhere Nov 2014 #7

The problem is, since they didn't do measurements justiceischeap Nov 2014 #12

I have been asking this question a lot BrotherIvan Nov 2014 #9

The public does not have a right to have Wilson on trial Gman Nov 2014 #13

You missed the entire gist of the article justiceischeap Nov 2014 #14

No, it wasn't a trial, it was a grand jury pipoman Nov 2014 #20

'and in another breath proclaim Snowden a hero Ichingcarpenter Nov 2014 #42

nobody has a legal or constitutional right to a public trial of anyone without probable cause TorchTheWitch Nov 2014 #56