Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There are reasons in which it is an appropriate or desirable alternative to a preliminary hearing. The California Grand Jury Association cites multiple surveys that have been taken of California district attorneys, who listed the following factors as influential in the decision to seek a grand jury indictment rather than using the preliminary hearing:

• High public interest in the case;

• The fact that a preliminary hearing would take more time than a grand jury hearing;

• The necessity for calling children or timid witnesses who would be subject to cross‑examination at a preliminary hearing;

• The ability to test a witness before a jury;

• Where the secrecy of the grand jury may allow defendants to be charged and taken into custody before they can pose potential danger to a witness' safety or flee from the jurisdiction;

• Where the identity of undercover agents needs to be protected;

• The existence of a weak or doubtful case which the district attorney wishes to test;

• The opportunity to involve the community in case screening; and

• Whether the case involves malfeasance in office.

https://www.pooleshaffery.com/news/2014/december/a-crash-cou...



Thanks for the list, I still would like to understand why a Grand Jury needs to exist when our countries, presumably, also have the same set of problems but not a Grand Jury.

I wonder how other common law systems handle this (not a lawyer, am genuinely asking).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: