We have all heard that “a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich” (Wachtler, 1985) refers to the belief that grand juries tend to approve prosecutors’ requests for indictments overwhelmingly. This raises questions about the system’s fairness and whether it should be reformed or become more transparent.
The grand jury process is not just a part, but a cornerstone of the U.S. legal system. It is designed to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of every individual, irrespective of their societal status. This process ensures fairness and consistency in the application of the law to all members of the community. It is a testament to our commitment to principles such as due process and the presumption of innocence, aiming to safeguard individual rights and ensure accountability in the pursuit of justice.
Recent discussions of the grand jury process in the media by journalists, pundits, civil libertarians, political officials, and community leaders have led to some misinformation about how and why the grand jury operates.
The grand jury process is a fundamental part of our legal system, and it is carried out by a group of 16 to 23 individuals who hear testimony in secret. Their role is not to seek punishment or guilt of the accused but to play a crucial role in determining whether there is probable cause to indict the person with a crime and proceed to trial. The prosecutor, who presents the case to the grand jury, is not an adversary but a facilitator of the process, ensuring that all relevant evidence is presented and explained.
Probable cause is the standard of proof that must be attained based on the facts presented to the grand jury and which would lead a reasonable and prudent person, through logical reasoning, to believe that the accused person committed a crime, as defined within the penal law. (C.law.n.d) It is important to note that only 12 of the 23 jury members must agree that there is sufficient evidence (probable cause) for an indictment or true bill.
In legal terms, the correct name for an indictment is “a true bill,” indicating that the grand jury believes the prosecutor has provided sufficient evidence that the accused individual should proceed to trial.
The Grand Jury process was designed by our founding fathers to protect every individual’s rights. However, the very process that protects these rights is being challenged. Understanding the legal process that requires no adjustment based on the optimistic hopes of more transparency from the police department may cause irreparable damage to our justice system.
While law enforcement officials are legally permitted to release information immediately, they should do so with great diligence. The sentiment of law enforcement executives who want to release this information when available to the public is understandable, as it may provide greater transparency and de-escalate potentially violent situations.
However, the problem with releasing information too quickly during the preliminary findings is that it may not reflect the actual outcome of the incident. This premature release may cause an emotional and violent escalation from the public before a full, thorough, proper investigation is completed.
The premature release of the preliminary findings can have serious consequences. It may taint a Grand Jury investigation before all the evidence has been collected and processed. This underscores the importance of a complete and thorough investigation before any information is made public.
Law enforcement executives can provide greater transparency when their officers engage in criminal behavior or gross police misconduct, such as excessive use of force, racial profiling, or corruption, by separating them from gainful employment and working proactively and aggressively with the District Attorney’s Office to pursue criminal charges.
Law enforcement executives may want to assign a public relations officer to each incident so that up-to-date, real-time information can be released. This approach will prevent rumors or incomplete and inaccurate information from inflaming the situation.
Transparency from the law enforcement community does not have to come from altering or changing the Grand Jury process. It should come from strong leadership that focus on Justice and the rule of law.
References:
In 1985, Sol Wachtler, then the chief justice of New York’s Supreme Court said, “Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.”
Probable Cause, n.d. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause#:~:text=Probable%20cause%20refers%20to%20a,searched%20(for%20a%20search
Grand Jury, n.d. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Grand+Jury
True Bill, n.d. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/true%20bill
