di-glossia: martinkhall: hungry-joe: trans-mom: Well I’m just shocked! Very shocked! THEY DIDN
di-glossia:martinkhall:hungry-joe:trans-mom:Well I’m just shocked! Very shocked!THEY DIDNT FUCKING TELL THE JURORS THEY COULD CHARGE THE OFFICERS WITH MURDER. THIS IS A FUCKING KANGAROO COURT. My understanding of the way the grand jury works is that it’s not that they didn’t tell the jurors that they could and the jurors were just too stupid to do it, with a grand jury they are literally only allowed to choose from the options given to them. So this is 100% on the attorney general.In the US, juries choose from the possible verdicts provided by the court.Basically, juries are given a list of written options with the requirements to meet each verdict. It looks like the grand jury did what it could with the options it had and the case was seriously misrepresented to the public.also like… evidentiary rules don’t apply. we talk about hearsay and relevance re: Law & Order - none of that matters. you can admit ANY EVIDENCE in a grand jury trial. the defense don’t bring up a case - it’s wholly the prosecutor’s show. the prosecutor doesn’t have a duty to show mitigating (or probably aggravating) evidence.also totally absolutely completely unrelated to any of that - my criminal procedure prof says that a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich.but prosecutorial discretion -- source link
#criminal procedure#grand juries#breonna taylor#current events