A Grand Jury has the responsibility to discuss the prosecutors evidence in a possible case and decide if the evidence presented is enough to proceed to a formal trial. It's an integral part in some states legal systems to screen cases to make sure there is enough there and there is probable cause. I'm going to say that there was not enough evidence in the case against Darren Wilson. It is so easy to indict from a Grand Jury. The jury does not have to be in total agreement. Normally just 3/4 quarters have to agree to indict. They also only have to have probable cause not the beyond the reasonable doubt standard in a normal trial. As fivethirtyeight blog says here it is extremely rare for a grand jury not to indict because the prosecutor can decide which cases to bring. I think we must be convinced that there was not evidence to convince the jurors that police misconduct occurred.
They still examine all the evidence and can bring in any person to testify before them. It is a tough job to decide the fate of a person. We must be convinced that they did the best of their ability to try and shift through everything to get the just outcome. The jurors have a real person's life in their hands let's believe that they took the case seriously.
The best thing we can do is work to change the system if we think it is faulty. We should also respect the decision of our fellow citizens on the jury and believe that Darren Wilson had no police misconduct in his handling of Michael Brown. What is bad is looting businesses because a grand jury decision should not be an excuse to rob people of their livelihood.
No comments:
Post a Comment