Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Probably unconsitution, but hey it's california. I don't even know if that state is even part of the US anymore.
You haven't a clue. The grand jury clause of Amendment V has never been incorporated against the states. Since I know you haven't the foggiest idea what the means, here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine
So it has never been required under the United States Constitution that state crimes be put before a grand jury. Only federal crimes face this requirement. As a result, only 23 states require the use of grand juries for serious crimes. In 25 states, grand juries are used on an optional basis (California is one of these states). 2 states do not use grand juries at all (Connecticut and Pennsylvania).
How can you claim to care so much about the Constitution when you know so little about it?
I'm actually against this. This will lead to district attorneys pandering more to public opinion and the mob instead of seeking to uphold the rule of law.
You haven't a clue. The grand jury clause of Amendment V has never been incorporated against the states. Since I know you haven't the foggiest idea what the means, here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine
So it has never been required under the United States Constitution that state crimes be put before a grand jury. Only federal crimes face this requirement. As a result, only 23 states require the use of grand juries for serious crimes. In 25 states, grand juries are used on an optional basis (California is one of these states). 2 states do not use grand juries at all (Connecticut and Pennsylvania).
How can you claim to care so much about the Constitution when you know so little about it?
True. Although I expect the requirement to be incorporated against the states sooner rather than later, especially as experiments like these lead to more politicized prosecutions where prosecutors give way to mob justice.
I'm actually against this. This will lead to district attorneys pandering more to public opinion and the mob instead of seeking to uphold the rule of law.
I agree with this sentiment. All this is going to do is encourage mob rule.
.
.
. As to whether a DA typically sways a jury, Cohen said, "Virtually every prosecutor in a grand jury puts their thumb on a scale," with statements urging the jurors to focus on one testimony over another.
.
.
.
One professor of criminal law said Donovan described "ideally what a prosecutor is supposed to do. But there are lots of ways in which prosecutors intentionally or unintentionally can lead a grand jury in a particular investigation."
.
.
. CBS News... Why Grand Jury indictments in police shootings is so rare
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
