From: Jasper
Date: 8/17/01
Time: 9:16:17 AM
Jolana,
Here is another little something most people don't know about the constitiution:
" In 1791, when the grand jury was incorporated into our constitutional structure, its primary role was to protect the individual from unfounded accusations. As one observer has noted, "the grand jury had achieved renown as a bulwark against despotism, a protector of the common man against oppressive prosecution. The institution's investigatory role was secondary." But, in the subsequent 200 years, in the federal system anyway, "the protective function has been trivialized and the investigator's function expanded to the point where the institution is almost precisely the opposite of what the Founding Fathers intended."1
"Today, many would agree with the observation of William J. Campbell, former federal district judge in Chicago: "[T]oday, the grand jury is the total captive of the prosecutor who, if he is candid, will concede that he can indict anybody, at any time, for almost anything, before any grand jury."2
"What this means is that the federal grand jury is a secret ex parte proceeding where the evidence is presented by the prosecutor and the grand jury votes whether to indict without ever hearing from the court (other than a preliminary session welcoming the grand jurors and giving some general guidelines about their duties) or defense counsel. Unsurprisingly, under these circumstances the grand jurors tend to bond with the prosecutor and indict when the prosecutor indicates there should be an indictment.
"Thus, the federal grand jury today functions primarily as a tool of the federal prosecutor. Employing the power of compulsory process in a secret proceeding, the prosecutor investigates and determines, with virtually no check, who will be indicted and for what.
"In the federal grand jury, the prosecutor exercises this enormous power unrestrained by law or judicial supervision. The grand jury process is largely devoid of legal rules. The prosecutor can present the evidence he or she wants to present in the manner he or she wants to present it. The only theoretical restriction is that, if an indictment is rendered, the evidence should be sufficient to establish probable cause that the accused committed the crime charged. Even that minimal test, however, finds no mechanism in the federal system for its enforcement. Any claimed insufficiency, unfairness or abuse in the grand jury proceedings is said to "merge" in the trial — prejudice from grand jury impropriety is deemed "cured" by a fair trial. But an indictment alone can cause enormous harm to an individual or business accused.
"The result is a federal grand jury process virtually immune from judicial supervision. Because grand jury procedure presently is given little legal significance, federal courts engage in little scrutiny of what happens there. While some prosecutors may conduct grand jury proceedings with meticulous care and concern for fairness to targets, others may not. If abuses do occur, they will rarely come to light.