法律英语:29 Grand Juries
时间:2018-12-30 作者:英语课 分类:法律英语 Legal Lad
by Michael W. Flynn
First, a disclaimer: Although I am an attorney, the legal information in this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for seeking personalized legal advice from an attorney licensed 1 to practice in your jurisdiction 2. Further, I do not intend to create an attorney-client relationship with any listener.
Ever wonder why grand juries are grand? Bryan from Alabama did, and wrote:
Here's a question that's been on my mind for awhile -- what's the difference between a "grand jury" and a regular old jury?
Both juries are groups of people that make findings of fact in criminal cases, but grand juries are used before an accused goes to trial, and regular juries are used to determine guilt 3 after trial.
Historically, grand juries were used in various public matters. In the 18th century in America, private citizens could petition a grand jury of citizens to determine whether the government should repair a bridge, or whether a tax collector was neglecting his duties, or whether the government should prosecute 4 a crime. The grand jury had the power to go out and conduct its own investigations 5.
In modern times, grand juries have slowly disappeared, mostly due to the trend of the legislature creating administrative 6 bodies to handle things like public works. They are now only used with any regularity 7 in the U.S., only for criminal cases, and even here in only about half of the states. Today, grand juries are called only for the purpose of determining whether the prosecutor 8, usually the district attorney, has presented enough evidence to allow a trial to go forward. So, if the DA has evidence that a murder has been committed, the DA must present the evidence to the grand jury, and the grand jury decides whether there is enough evidence to charge the accused and proceed with trial. The accused does not participate in the proceedings 9, the proceedings are almost entirely 10 secret, and the grand jury can compel certain witnesses to appear and testify.
However, only the federal government and about half the states even use grand juries. And, in the jurisdictions 11 that do, only charges of felonies or other serious crimes require the use of a grand jury. For misdemeanors, the DA can usually just file the criminal case against the accused and proceed to trial.
In jurisdictions that do not use grand juries, there is usually a preliminary hearing conducted before a judge that serves about the same purpose. So, rather than presenting evidence in secret to a grand jury, a DA will present the evidence he has to a judge, and the judge determines whether there is even enough evidence to move forward with trial.
The purpose of both the grand jury and the preliminary hearing is a form of check on the power of the DA. Rather than the DA being allowed to just charge anyone with anything and force a trial, the DA must muster 12 enough evidence, not to prove guilt, but to prove that there is at least enough suspicion to force a person to go through the criminal justice system. In both situations if the grand jury or judge disagrees with the DA, and does not think the evidence is enough, then the DA cannot move forward to trial against the accused. If the grand jury agrees with the DA, then the grand jury will issue an indictment 13. Grand juries are typically made of up to 23 people.
A “regular” jury, sometimes called a petit jury, is the jury that most people know from Law and Order: it is the group of 12 peers who listen to the evidence presented in a trial, and determine whether the prosecutor has proven that the defendant 14 committed the illegal acts charged beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the second jury, and the second set of checks that is imposed on the government before it can take away a person’s freedom.
So, a grand jury is not fancier or better than a regular jury – it just serves a different purpose in the criminal justice process, and at a different time.
Thank you for listening to Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful 15 Life. Be sure to take the short listener survey by clicking on the green 5 to the right of the transcript 16.
You can send questions and comments to...........or call them in to the voicemail line at 206-202-4LAW. Please note that doing so will not create an attorney-client relationship and will be used for the purposes of this podcast only.
- The new drug has not yet been licensed in the US. 这种新药尚未在美国获得许可。
- Is that gun licensed? 那支枪有持枪执照吗?
- It doesn't lie within my jurisdiction to set you free.我无权将你释放。
- Changzhou is under the jurisdiction of Jiangsu Province.常州隶属江苏省。
- She tried to cover up her guilt by lying.她企图用谎言掩饰自己的罪行。
- Don't lay a guilt trip on your child about schoolwork.别因为功课责备孩子而使他觉得很内疚。
- I am trying my best to prosecute my duties.我正在尽力履行我的职责。
- Is there enough evidence to prosecute?有没有起诉的足够证据?
- His investigations were intensive and thorough but revealed nothing. 他进行了深入彻底的调查,但没有发现什么。
- He often sent them out to make investigations. 他常常派他们出去作调查。
- The administrative burden must be lifted from local government.必须解除地方政府的行政负担。
- He regarded all these administrative details as beneath his notice.他认为行政管理上的这些琐事都不值一顾。
- The idea is to maintain the regularity of the heartbeat.问题就是要维持心跳的规律性。
- He exercised with a regularity that amazed us.他锻炼的规律程度令我们非常惊讶。
- The defender argued down the prosecutor at the court.辩护人在法庭上驳倒了起诉人。
- The prosecutor would tear your testimony to pieces.检查官会把你的证言驳得体无完肤。
- He was released on bail pending committal proceedings. 他交保获释正在候审。
- to initiate legal proceedings against sb 对某人提起诉讼
- The fire was entirely caused by their neglect of duty. 那场火灾完全是由于他们失职而引起的。
- His life was entirely given up to the educational work. 他的一生统统献给了教育工作。
- Butler entreated him to remember the act abolishing the heritable jurisdictions. 巴特勒提醒他注意废除世袭审判权的国会法令。
- James I personally adjudicated between the two jurisdictions. 詹姆士一世亲自裁定双方纠纷。
- Go and muster all the men you can find.去集合所有你能找到的人。
- I had to muster my courage up to ask him that question.我必须鼓起勇气向他问那个问题。
- He handed up the indictment to the supreme court.他把起诉书送交最高法院。
- They issued an indictment against them.他们起诉了他们。
- The judge rejected a bribe from the defendant's family.法官拒收被告家属的贿赂。
- The defendant was borne down by the weight of evidence.有力的证据使被告认输了。
- It is not lawful to park in front of a hydrant.在消火栓前停车是不合法的。
- We don't recognised him to be the lawful heir.我们不承认他为合法继承人。
- A transcript of the tapes was presented as evidence in court.一份录音带的文字本作为证据被呈交法庭。
- They wouldn't let me have a transcript of the interview.他们拒绝给我一份采访的文字整理稿。