Cops: No Snarky Nor Positive Title

[rufus]

Doesn't the grand jury though, only consider on the charges put before them by the prosecutor? Meaning, if they thought those two officers acted responsibly, then he didn't put forward any charges against them? Or if he only put a charge of manslaughter before the jury, they can't vote to indict for murder.

 

[Handyman]

Doesn't the grand jury though, only consider on the charges put before them by the prosecutor? Meaning, if they thought those two officers acted responsibly, then he didn't put forward any charges against them? Or if he only put a charge of manslaughter before the jury, they can't vote to indict for murder.

From what I read the GJ can ask about other changes and the prosecution has to explain it and they can choose to indict. Not sure they would do that if the DA is saying they think it is justified.

And the AG chose to release the transcript so no one to blame but themselves for the backlash.

(Again based on the articles I have read)

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Grand juries are so rare here, and I don't do criminal law, that i don't know for sure. But the adage that a prosecutor could secure an indictment against a ham sandwich probably holds true because they are generally one sided affairs. The prosecutor puts on what they want and nothing else. The biggest inconsistency in treatment when it comes to cops versus the average defendant is that prosecutors often present a fuller picture for the cops, giving the grand jury an out.

Not saying that happened here, but it's possible.

Michigan's criminal law allows for grand juries, but is is almost never used there either. Instead the prosecution holds a preliminary hearing before a district court judge, who will decide if there is sufficient probable cause to charge a defendant and bound the case to the circuit courts. The biggest difference is in the preliminary hearing, the defense is allowed to bring evidence of their own and cross examine witnesses. I would imagine there are plusses and minuses to both systems, but I think Michigan's avoidance of grand juries is probably better overall.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Michigan's criminal law allows for grand juries, but is is almost never used there either. Instead the prosecution holds a preliminary hearing before a district court judge, who will decide if there is sufficient probable cause to charge a defendant and bound the case to the circuit courts. The biggest difference is in the preliminary hearing, the defense is allowed to bring evidence of their own and cross examine witnesses. I would imagine there are plusses and minuses to both systems, but I think Michigan's avoidance of grand juries is probably better overall.

Big plus for the jury pool - grand jury duty lasts for months and no one wants that sh*t.

 

[Chuck Murray]

From what I read the GJ can ask about other changes and the prosecution has to explain it and they can choose to indict. Not sure they would do that if the DA is saying they think it is justified.

Absolutely spot on correct. Again. The DA knows the law. The GJ are usually non-lawyers.

I hope all of this agreement stuff isn't hurting your cred with the rest of the Loungers ...

 

[Kepler]

Big plus for the jury pool - grand jury duty lasts for months and no one wants that sh*t.

I have now been subject to 27 jury calls and never had to as much go in for selection. I have joked (?) with my wife when it happens it will be the longest GJ in history and last for years, like one of those Medieval Kyoto trials where the jurors literally had to sell their homes and moved to the court city.

 

[Handyman]

I was supposed to be in a Federal Grand Jury in May but it got cancelled due to the Pandemic. I was on a jury once like 15 years ago on a lawsuit against a McDonald's. Wasn't much of a trial...

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

I got the call once, and actually had to go into the courtroom. They picked a jury before my number came up, and then the other case was settled so they sent us all home. That was maybe 6 or 7 years ago? Nothing since.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

I was brought up for jury selection the one time I got called to duty and was eliminated for cause.

 

[Kepler]

I was brought up for jury selection the one time I got called to duty and was eliminated for cause.

I read this in mookie's voice for some reason. Like it was a sex tourism case and they didn't want a subject matter expert.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

I was brought up for jury selection the one time I got called to duty and was eliminated for cause.

My case would've been an auto accident personal injury suit, and I watched a couple people get struck by claiming they had bad past experiences with chiropractors (the defendant's chiro was one of his expert witnesses).

 

[ScoobyDoo]

My case would've been an auto accident personal injury suit, and I watched a couple people get struck by claiming they had bad past experiences with chiropractors (the defendant's chiro was one of his expert witnesses).

Mine was a drunk driving case. My past experience with alcohol got me axed.,

 

[Chuck Murray]

My case would've been an auto accident personal injury suit, and I watched a couple people get struck by claiming they had bad past experiences with chiropractors (the defendant's chiro was one of his expert witnesses).

Interesting ... and unusual. Defendants rarely dignify a chiropractor treating a plaintiff with an opposing chiropractic expert, since there are indeed loads of folks out there who have had bad past experiences with chiropractors. Most defendants will simply rely on cross-examinations that focus on the limitations of the practice, as opposed to "traditional" medical practice.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Never once.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Minneapolis PD tries community outreach. They decide to screen the movie Black Panther near the area where Floyd was killed.

it was cancelled.

https://bringmethenews.com/minnesot...td7X7oGtkuD_Z9cck3VmgMsMHcjHba2_qK-TGwNIPgX3A

 

[St. Clown]

On the subject of juries, I’ve been called in twice. Once I was shortlisted but not put on the jury. I was 20yo at the time. And then when I was 28. I never made into the courtroom that time.

 

[burd]

On the subject of juries, I’ve been called in twice. Once I was shortlisted but not put on the jury. I was 20yo at the time. And then when I was 28. I never made into the courtroom that time.

What do you mean "shortlisted?" In the courtroom but not to the box for voir dire?

 

[rufus]

Better than my only jury duty, they chose 14 who had to sit and listen to the case, and then picked the 12 at the end to deliberate. I assume in case people got sick or otherwise would not be there.

I was one of the two let go. After spending like two days hearing the case.

 

[psych]

My only jury duty was during my birthday month. Trial was for a guy accused of second-degree murder and some drug charges stemming from a drug deal gone wrong, or something along those lines. I was among the final 32 selected from an initial pool of 100, but not the final 14. I think the guy ended up getting somewhere around 7-10 years. Never had to serve a day.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Better than my only jury duty, they chose 14 who had to sit and listen to the case, and then picked the 12 at the end to deliberate. I assume in case people got sick or otherwise would not be there.

I was one of the two let go. After spending like two days hearing the case.

I always feel bad for the alternates, but at least you only had to sit through two days. Last Spring we had a 3-week civil trial (construction defect case), selecting 10 with 2 alternates (12 total). When the judge dismissed the 2 alternates, they had a look of WTF.