Grand Jury Process Analysis

According to the authors, which of the following suggestions has NOT been offered to permit trial jurors to play a more active role in a trial?

In America’s justice system, a grand jury is a group of citizens called to decide whether probable cause exists to believe that a suspect committed the crime with which she or he has been charged (Gaines G-4). In the Central District of California, prospective jurors who report and are not excused or postponed, the Jury Clerk will use a computer program to randomly select 23 members and ten alternates for each grand jury. A grand jury designated “investigatory” meet for a 12-month term, while a grand jury designated “accusatory” meets for a 6-month term. A grand jury has 23 members and meets once a week, always on the same weekday. Grand juries do not meet on weekends or Mondays. The average workday is 5 hours. Absences for medical appointments, vacations, graduations, etc. may be accommodated, but 16 members must be present for the grand jury to conduct business. The grand jury serves the United States District Court, Central District of California. In contrast, a trial jury is asked to reach a verdict based on the evidence presented during a civil or criminal trial; a grand jury meets in secret to consider whether there is sufficient evidence to justify a formal criminal charge against someone. That formal criminal charge is called an “indictment” (Central).

Grand jury is a group that examines accusations against persons charged with a crime, the grand jury does not decide guilt or innocence. Its function is inquisitorial and accusatorial. Standard court trial juries are normally 6 or 12people, yet in the government framework, a fantastic jury can be 16 to 23 individuals. There is no judge display and as often as possible there are no legal advisors aside from the prosecutor. The prosecutor will disclose the law to the jury and work with them to assemble confirm and hear declaration completely implies that crafted by the excellent jury isn't made receivable to the general population or, in most cases, to the respondent or defendant. Only an Assistant of United States Attorney and a stenographer meet with the grand jurors and plus those witnesses who are subpoenaed to give proof. under typical court guidelines of confirmation, displays and other declaration must follow excessively strict standards previously affirmation. The Grand Jury is superior to the preliminary hearing system in that the evidence is heard in camera and without undue influence. In most cases when the police arrest someone for a crime, the case goes to a lower court for a Preliminary hearing and after that, if the Judge of the lower court finds Probable Cause then the case is referred to the higher Court of Record who then assigns it to be

The real issue in the grand jury's decision to not indict is not even the actions of the officers who chose to confront a potentially armed child head-on instead of setting up a ways back and talking to him. The issue is not the "seconds" that it took for the shooting to take place. The issue is whether or not the prosecutor even wanted the grand jury to move forward and look at the officers' behavior and potential liability.

A grand jury is a group of approximately 23 individuals involved in trying federal criminal cases, who are presented with evidence by the prosecutor in which they use to determine if there is “probable cause” to indicate that a crime has been committed and if the accused should be taken to trial. (United State Courts, 2012)

Several pairs of eyes trail the prosecutor as he puts forth his reasons as to why the defendant should be guilty. Several pairs of ears listen intently in a trance like mode, also cautious of every detail. The prosecutor presents the facts with great gusto, painting a picture of the defendant in a bad light. Once he is done, the defendant’s lawyer takes the stage and he too, with great effort, puts forth reasons as to why his client is innocent. In the end, when everything is said and done and it time for the verdict, only one voice answers to the court clerk out of the 12 men and women. These 12 people are the jurymen and they play an equally important role as the lawyers and judges of a court trial. In fact, a jury is the sole decider, based

Frank, M. (2011). Challenging Peremptories: Suggested Reforms to the Jury Selection Process Using Minnesota as a Case Study. In review.law.umm.edu. Retrieved November 29, 2014, from http://review.law.umn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Frank_MLR.pdf

Grand jury proceedings are kept in STRICT CONFIDENCE this will encourage a witness to speak freely without the fear of retaliation (a witness should always feel comfortable) and it always helps protect the reputation if the jury decide to not indict. A unanimous decision isn’t required from the grand jury when trying to indict, however, it does require a supermajority vote, even if a grand jury doesn’t choose to indict the defendant the prosecutor still has the power to bring the defendant to trial if they have a strong enough case. The grand jury indictment helps get a trial started more quickly without an indictment from the grand jury it makes the prosecutor will have to present to the judge that there is enough to proceed on with the

This essay is purposed for the evaluation of the provocative case, The State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, more commonly referred to as O.J. Simpson. On the 12th of June, 1994 the homicide of Nicole Simpson, O.J. Simpson’s ex-wife, occurred at her home. Reports of a body sprawled out the front of Nicole Simpson’s house were made through a 911 call. On arrival, police made the discovery of Nicole Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman’s dead bodies outside the house. The review of this investigation will be achieved through; Assessment of the key aspects of the process of investigation. Evaluation of the main investigative flaws made throughout the investigation. Identifying strategies to prevent these flaws from happening in

The relationship between law enforcement and prosecutors, which goes hand-in-hand, can’t be overlooked. Evidence of a crime that detectives and law enforcement discover is as equally important as a good trial on part of the prosecution. If detectives aren’t able to find good solid evidence – that case usually isn’t bothered in being pursued. Several years ago, in the late 80’s, there was a murder case in Southeastern Oklahoma which now serves as a tragic example to the need for honest, constitutional work in the criminal justice system. Disreputable investigative procedures, fraudulent sources, and bad evidence were the foundation of this case that shattered innocent lives.

Commentators charge that the system insulates the interests of the wealthy and the influential that can hire the services of top level counsel to be able to manipulate the members of the jury to secure an acquittal for their clients. In the same breath, compared to the rich and wealthy, the poor, African American, illiterate or with an inferior education are traditionally represented by overburdened public attorneys who cannot secure an acquittal from a juries predominantly composed of affluent individuals on the other end of the “societal ladder.”

    Should the U.S. Judical branch take action to prevent wrongful convictions and improve police investigations, or should the government spend its time and resources on other things?

Give a real life example of prosecutor misconduct and indicate briefly how/if that prosecutor was punished?

The Selection and Role of a Jury in a Criminal Trial This assignment focuses on how a jury is selected and its role in a

The right to a trial by jury is a core element of the United States Criminal Justice System. This right is guaranteed to all citizens by the highest law of the land: The United States Constitution. But are juries truly an effective means of securing justice? The movie 12 Angry Men provides commentary on this question with its portrayal of twelve jurors deliberating over a murder case. The jury initially seems bound to condemn the defendant, a young man of nineteen years, to the electric chair, but a single man, Juror no. 8 descents against the majority. Over the course of the film, tensions rise, and after much debate Juror no. 8 manages to convince the other eleven jurors to eventually vote not guilty. Through their debates and casual side conversations, we are shown the role of personal biases and group manipulation tactics that can impede with objective analysis and ultimately the attainment of justice. Thus, the Movie 12 Angry Men mostly serves to challenge the jury system as a means of securing justice by demonstrating the harmful effects of personal biases, the lack of dedication to the system, and the potential for manipulative tactics.