We’ve seen the cases where police shoot and kill a person like the incident in Ferguson, Mo.  Here in Minnesota, we have a case where a man who interfered with a domestic problem was shot and killed by the police.  In all these, and other cases, the police shootings of citizens has caused outrage.  The response of elected prosecutors has been to send the case to a grand jury to determine if the police acted improperly.  Should the cops be charged with a crime?

Only police are authorized to use deadly force in our communities.  If any of the rest of us killed someone, we’d be charged with murder.  Traditionally, most prosecutors used a grand jury to determine if the use of deadly force by police was a “reasonable use of force under the circumstances.”  A grand jury is made up of random citizens chosen to hear the case.  Unlike a jury trial, the grand jury meets in secret and hears testimony and evidence presented by the prosecutor.  The accused person (the cop) is not present nor is any defense lawyer present.  The grand jury makes a decision to either indict the accused or not.  It’s important to remember the purpose of the grand jury is not to find guilt or innocence.  It’s only to determine if a person should be charged with a crime.

California has already banned the use of grand juries in police shooting cases.  Today, in Minnesota, local prosecutor Mike Freeman said he would change 40 years of practice and not use a grand jury in the shooting of a local man.  http://video.startribune.com/freeman-no-grand-jury-in-jamar-clark-case/372243011/

Why would a prosecutor use a grand jury?

1.  It removes the decision-making from the elected prosecutor.  Especially, in difficult cases—like police shootings—the prosecutor could hand-off the case to a grand jury and avoid having to make a difficult decision.
2. In some cases, like first degree murder in Minnesota, the case must go to a grand jury for a charging decision.  In the police shooting cases, either the prosecutor or a grand jury can make that decision.
3. It avoids pressure from political groups or protesting groups.  Since the grand jury meets in secret, they are insulated from the pressures of the media, protesters, and politics.  In a democracy, we don’t want the mob to make decisions in such serious situations.

Why get rid of a grand jury?

1. The hearings are in secret and many people don’t trust the institutions.  Especially, when cops are the potential accused, many groups feel the system is biased in favor of the cops.  They point out that of all the grand jury hearings in the country about police shootings, few, if any, cops are indicted.
2. If an elected prosecutor makes the decision and the community becomes upset, they can always vote the prosecutor out of office.
3. By bringing the case out of the secrecy of a grand jury proceeding, the process certainly seems more transparent and fair.

What do you think?