Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Freinds and Neighbors
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="greybeard" data-source="post: 1166638" data-attributes="member: 18945"><p>Using a grand jury actually INCREASES the odds of it NOT going to a jury trial. Their sole job is to determine if the DA and investigative people have enough evidence to warrant a trial and charge or not. </p><p></p><p>BHB, in the instance you posted, the DA is probably a supporter of concealed carry and a supporter of handguns in general. What if he was not? If he were predisposed to push for a jury trial in all shootings, then this shooter could very well find himself fighting for his life based only on how one individual felt about a bigger issue. The grandjury on the other hand is already impaneled anyway, made up of a variety of people from everyday walks of life,and the hear several cases everyday (if the grand jury I was on is any indication).</p><p>The GJ is simply a check and balance against prejudicial DAs and biased evidence gathering and presentation.</p><p>If I have to have the evidence against me weighed, I would rather it be judged by my peers and not by a single (probably) career politician looking to make a name for himself.</p><p></p><p></p><p>There is no defense evidence presented at a grand jury. All they rule on, is whether the DA has presented enough evidence to proceed with a jury trial. In many cases, the defendant's attorneys aren't present, and if they are, they can not present any evidence. The grand jury rules on presented prosecutorial evidence--nothing else. They do NOT decide innocence or guilt. </p><p>By protocol, much of the information the DA has seen is not allowed at GJ testimony. They don't hear ((for instance) that a suspect had a long record or if he was squeaky clean--but the DA has already been informed of such outside information, not directly associated with this particular case, so his mindset can (and often is) tainted with info that really doesn't pertain to the case in question. GJ is not a formality--it's to keep the DA on the straight and narrow.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="greybeard, post: 1166638, member: 18945"] Using a grand jury actually INCREASES the odds of it NOT going to a jury trial. Their sole job is to determine if the DA and investigative people have enough evidence to warrant a trial and charge or not. BHB, in the instance you posted, the DA is probably a supporter of concealed carry and a supporter of handguns in general. What if he was not? If he were predisposed to push for a jury trial in all shootings, then this shooter could very well find himself fighting for his life based only on how one individual felt about a bigger issue. The grandjury on the other hand is already impaneled anyway, made up of a variety of people from everyday walks of life,and the hear several cases everyday (if the grand jury I was on is any indication). The GJ is simply a check and balance against prejudicial DAs and biased evidence gathering and presentation. If I have to have the evidence against me weighed, I would rather it be judged by my peers and not by a single (probably) career politician looking to make a name for himself. There is no defense evidence presented at a grand jury. All they rule on, is whether the DA has presented enough evidence to proceed with a jury trial. In many cases, the defendant's attorneys aren't present, and if they are, they can not present any evidence. The grand jury rules on presented prosecutorial evidence--nothing else. They do NOT decide innocence or guilt. By protocol, much of the information the DA has seen is not allowed at GJ testimony. They don't hear ((for instance) that a suspect had a long record or if he was squeaky clean--but the DA has already been informed of such outside information, not directly associated with this particular case, so his mindset can (and often is) tainted with info that really doesn't pertain to the case in question. GJ is not a formality--it's to keep the DA on the straight and narrow. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Freinds and Neighbors
Top