3 ms·

Grand juries don't seem to correct the most egregious errors in either direction. Consider the famous assertion that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indic

Grand juries don't seem to correct the most egregious errors in either direction. Consider the famous assertion that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. On the other hand, consider the recent non-indictment of Darren Wilson. How often do grand juries defy the prosecutor's wishes? I certainly agree that a check on prosecutorial discretion is badly needed. But the grand jury system doesn't seem to be providing it.

rayiner 12y ago
Aggregated statistics on grand juries are hard to come by, but let's use a random county for example: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/special-reports/article3967625.html http://www.star-telegram.com/news/special-reports/article396.... Grand juries in Tarrant County, Texas declined to indict 11% of felony cases. Floating around the internet, you can find numbers ranging from 3-4% in New York counties to 5% in Texas as a whole. The high rate of indictments, of course, doesn't prove that the grand jury system doesn't act as a check on prosecutorial discretion. An AMA study found that the largest health insurers reject 2.7-6.8% of all claims: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/18/health-care-america-now/tv-ad-overstates-health-insurance-denials http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/.... Does the low rate of denials indicate that insurers' claim processes are an inadequate check on fraudulent claims? By your reasoning, it does.
- ScottBurson 12y ago
  Thanks for the numbers. I agree that 3-5% doesn't necessarily seem too low. And of course the stats don't show the number of indictments that were not sought because the prosecutor didn't think they had enough evidence even for a grand jury. Still, the "ham sandwich" comment disturbs me. Do you think it has no basis in reality? Considering the emphasis we put on adversarial proceedings in this country, does it not seem odd and potentially problematic that grand juries hear only one side?
- fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
  Not trying to be disagreeable, just want to add some info about Texas' crappy grand jury system. Texas' grand jury system is one of two IIRC that allow the use of the "pick-a-pal" system. Speaking from experience I can tell you that high-profile indictments are often discussed and decided before the indictment is presented, outside the juror's room. And finally, we're having a little crisis currently in Harris county over the threatening of a witness by a grand jury foreman who was also a retired police officer, serving on a grand jury that was deciding to indict a man for the murder of another police officer. http://www.texasmonthly.com/daily-post/grand-jury-system-texas-broken http://www.texasmonthly.com/daily-post/grand-jury-system-tex... http://www.texastribune.org/2014/09/15/time-ditch-key-man-grand-jury-system/ http://www.texastribune.org/2014/09/15/time-ditch-key-man-gr... http://www.constitution.org/jury/gj/041113_chron_casey.htm http://www.constitution.org/jury/gj/041113_chron_casey.htm

rayiner 12y ago

Aggregated statistics on grand juries are hard to come by, but let's use a random county for example: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/special-reports/article3967625.html http://www.star-telegram.com/news/special-reports/article396.... Grand juries in Tarrant County, Texas declined to indict 11% of felony cases. Floating around the internet, you can find numbers ranging from 3-4% in New York counties to 5% in Texas as a whole. The high rate of indictments, of course, doesn't prove that the grand jury system doesn't act as a check on prosecutorial discretion. An AMA study found that the largest health insurers reject 2.7-6.8% of all claims: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/18/health-care-america-now/tv-ad-overstates-health-insurance-denials http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/.... Does the low rate of denials indicate that insurers' claim processes are an inadequate check on fraudulent claims? By your reasoning, it does.

ScottBurson 12y ago
Thanks for the numbers. I agree that 3-5% doesn't necessarily seem too low. And of course the stats don't show the number of indictments that were not sought because the prosecutor didn't think they had enough evidence even for a grand jury. Still, the "ham sandwich" comment disturbs me. Do you think it has no basis in reality? Considering the emphasis we put on adversarial proceedings in this country, does it not seem odd and potentially problematic that grand juries hear only one side?
fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
Not trying to be disagreeable, just want to add some info about Texas' crappy grand jury system. Texas' grand jury system is one of two IIRC that allow the use of the "pick-a-pal" system. Speaking from experience I can tell you that high-profile indictments are often discussed and decided before the indictment is presented, outside the juror's room. And finally, we're having a little crisis currently in Harris county over the threatening of a witness by a grand jury foreman who was also a retired police officer, serving on a grand jury that was deciding to indict a man for the murder of another police officer. http://www.texasmonthly.com/daily-post/grand-jury-system-texas-broken http://www.texasmonthly.com/daily-post/grand-jury-system-tex... http://www.texastribune.org/2014/09/15/time-ditch-key-man-grand-jury-system/ http://www.texastribune.org/2014/09/15/time-ditch-key-man-gr... http://www.constitution.org/jury/gj/041113_chron_casey.htm http://www.constitution.org/jury/gj/041113_chron_casey.htm