We invite you to google "Grand Jury." When we did, we were in for a "grand" surprise!
Rules of the Grand Jury:
~No Judge is present in the court room.
~No defense attorney is allowed in the court room.
~***ONLY the Prosecutor may submit evidence to the Grand Jury, and he/she is NOT obligated to present ANY evidence that does not support their theory.
~***No witnesses may be called to DEFEND the accused, but ALL witnesses AGAINST the defendant may be called per the Prosecutor's decision.
~***The Grand Jury's supposed only purpose is to determine "probable cause"--but in order to do so, they must "conduct a mini-trial" of sorts (we're only quoting Maricopa County Prosecutor Andrew Thomas here... scan to follow.)
~The Grand Jury receives no instruction regarding the working of the legal system, excepting the immediate statutes the Prosecutor wishes them to consider, or which are used to support the Prosecutor's theory; these are not defined in depth, but only to the degree the Prosecutor decides to define them in support of his theory.
~***NO ONE screens the jurors for bias or fitness to serve, as is done for regular trials. It seems that "mini-trials" use "mini rules."
~Proceedings of the Grand Jury are SECRET. (watch out, folks-- you never know when your kid might be "mini-tried" behind closed doors, as Brent was!)
~Question: how can the Grand Jury determine a defendant's intent if ALL evidence is not submitted for consideration?
~Question: what if there are plausible OTHER theories that would assuredly change the nature of the charges (for example, mitigating circumstances, actual quoted statements from the accused, the correct interpretation of intent)?
~Question: what if some or all of the unrepresented evidence affects the manner in which the Prosecutor is allowed to file the charges?
~Question: if proceedings are SECRET, what has happened to the accused's CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to hear witnesses against him? Or do they only have the right to plead innocence AFTER they are "mini-tried"?
WE"D SINCERELY LIKE REASONABLE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS. THEY DO NOT APPEAR TO CONSIDER JUSTICE, THE POSSIBILITY OF INNOCENCE BEFORE A TRIAL, OR TO BE UPHOLDING THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Any opinions???
