Grand Jury

[tbieter]

Following the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, black men, in Ferguson, Mo, and New York City, respectively, and the failure of the grand juries to indict the white police officers involved, there have been some who have advocated that the law should prohibit prosecutors from taking cases involving citizen deaths/police involvement before a grand jury.

I disagree.

Like all things, the institution of the grand jury can be used properly or it can be abused.

For example, the other day a Minnesota grand jury indicted a white state highway patrolman for alleged felonies resulting in the deaths of two elderly white citizens:

"A Goodhue County grand jury indicted a state trooper Tuesday in the deaths of a Cannon Falls couple who were killed July 4 when their car was broadsided by the trooper’s as he sped to an accident.

Norman Scott, 78, and Geneva Scott, 79, died in the crash.

Trooper Scott R. Reps, 48, of Red Wing, faces two counts of second-degree manslaughter and one count of failure to drive with due care, according to a statement by the Winona County attorney’s office."
http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 62121.html

From when I was practicing, I remember another singular use of the grand jury in Duluth, a case involving John DeSanto, chief prosecutor, and Fred Friedman, the chief public defender. The case involved the alleged defense of the "battered woman's syndrome" before the syndrome was recognized as a legal defense in Minnesota.

As I recall, the abused wife had shot and killed her abuser husband as he slept. If my memory is accurate, he was a real monster, extremely violent to the wife and kids.

As you know, normally, only the prosecutor appears before the grand jury, calls witnesses and presents evidence, and asks the grand jury to issue particular charges. Critics frequently say that a prosecutor can get the grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich."

In the Duluth case, however, DeSanto permitted Friedman to be in the grand jury room and participate in the proceedings. His client testified.

I suspect that the proceeding was not an adversary proceeding. It was merely a presentation of all of the evidence. And then, the lawyers asked the grand jury to make the call. They choose not to indict the woman.

This was a courageous and creative use of the grand jury by two extremely competent and ethical Duluth lawyers.

It was also the use of the grand jury to make a democratic decision!

DeSanto is now a judge. He was the prosecutor mentioned in footnote 9 of my "rule departure" case:

"9 I was once appointed to represent a naïve young man who was charged, along with an accomplice (a burglar on parole), with aggravated assault, a charge which then carried a mandatory three-year prison sentence. They burglarized a lake cabin, took guns, and then drew upon the owner who unexpectedly appeared on the scene. Before the Hon. Donald Odden, a lion on the bench, (whose beloved lake cabin, incidentally, had been burglarized in the past), I argued for a rule departure, simply that it would be immoral and contrary to justice, to send my client to prison: He was retarded. He worked as a part-time garbage man. He was a dupe. Then the prosecutor, John DeSanto, told Odden to do what he thought “was right.” Odden then growled at the client, threatened prison if he screwed up, and placed him on probation."
http://www2.mnbar.org/benchandbar/2007/ ... _court.htm

In one of his books, the philosopher, Yves Simon, said the morality is largely about the use or abuse of things.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_1?rh= ... 1420083645

http://judgepedia.org/John_E._DeSanto
http://www.mncourts.gov/?page=JudgeBio_v2&ID=30527
http://minnlawyer.com/2014/04/17/friedm ... -defender/

[Impenitent]

when due process doesn't agree with the "democratic" mob you get utopia

-Imp