Pros And Cons Of A Grand Jury

704 Words3 Pages

A grand jury is composed of twelve people, to determine if there is enough evidence to send an accused individual to trial. Although they may not determine if the accused individual is guilty or not, they can issue a formal document saying there is enough evidence for the prosecutor to take the accused to trial also known as an indictment. According to, Texas Politics Today, “a grand jury may return indictments simply because the district attorney asks them to.” Which in the end is not fair, because the jury may believe that there is not enough sufficient evidence, but because they feel pressured they issue an indictment. In theory, grand juries sound like they are for the common good, but in reality they return ninety- five percent of cases, that have been brought to them. There was previous history to why grand juries are used in american politics today, not only for Texas government. According to, Columbia Law Review, it originated during the reign of Edward III. The term, le Grande Inquest, means that the best gentleman on the county, sit on a jury to determine if the criminal is guilty or not guilty. …show more content…

The grand jury is chosen by random computer selection based on the area that they live in. Depending where an individual may live this will determine whether or not the accused may have a fair child. The grand jury member may believe that since the accused individual is being accused for a crime the may or may not commit, just because it goes against their values they can decide they for indictment. If majority of the members have this same mindset, most likely there will be an indictment; which in turn could not be fair. The reason being why this is not fair because the accused individual, if put through a trial could be chosen as not guilty, but because the entire jury believed that there is indictment needed, then they are is no way that they would end up winning the

Show More

More about Pros And Cons Of A Grand Jury

Open Document