Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The government --- and a grand jury.

                   A TRUE BILL

                   b r e n d a   l    h a n n o n
                   _________________________________
                   Foreperson of the Grand Jury


    scott l garland             9 - 12 - 12
    _______________             ___________
    Assistand United States Attorney  

    DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
    September 12, 2012
    Returned into the District Court by the Grand Jurors and filed.
Granted: grand juries rarely refuse to indict. But it's not just the prosecutors behind this decision.


As someone who has served on a federal grand jury this is true (the rarity of a false bill), but is most likely due to two factors I saw over and over again:

1) The government generally doesn't bring borderline or weak cases in front of a grand jury. They have limited time and budget and don't want to pursue a case they don't feel is a sure thing (or, more accurately, a sure deal with the defendant as most cases do not go to trial).

2) Grand jury decisions need not be unanimous, only simple majority. I voted against indictment in a couple of cases I felt were weak, but they were indicted none-the-less. Further the burden of proof is not beyond a reasonable doubt but rather a preponderance of evidence[1], which is a lower bar.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_Burden_of_Proof#Preponder...


This made me wonder how often. http://www.freedomlaw.com/archives/oldsite/GRANDJRY.html says 0.6% in 1984.


Minor correction: 0.4% (the article reports a 99.6% indictment rate).


Thanks! I wrote that on an iPad at 3am and tried to check if I'd goofed, but it had no within-page search.


Part of this is because the federal criminal case load is so heavy that there's no use to even waste money and time taking a case to a grand jury that can't lead to an indictment.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: