The Grand Jury in the United States, Essay Example

Grand Juries should NOT be abolished. Please explain in detail why it should not be abolished?

The grand jury will seek to protect the ordinary citizen in two distinct  ways: [1] It limits the overall power of government to prosecute an individual providing the jury power to vote for or  against a particular indictment.  [2]  It enables the grand jury to make criminal activities known to the public and as such made  government or other regulated bodies accountable for their actions.  In the United States, the grand jury was established  as the fifth amendment to the Constitution.  The grand jury listens to evidence and decides whether the accused should be charged with a crime.  The difference between that and trial jurors is the grand jury determines probable cause, not guilt.  Owing to this rule it is not necessary for them to hear all the evidence in the case.

A better important role of the grand jury is the ability to issue a subpoena or command a person to attend court and provide evidence for testify.  Failure to comply can see you being held in civil contempt and this can result in a jail sentence.  Grand jury investigations seem to be a secretive affair.  The reason that these activities are held in a secretive manner of because: [1] the events and ongoing investigation of being either compromised or interfered with.  [2] it prevents the possibility of someone escaping potential indictment [3].  It enables witnesses who would be reluctant to come forward.  The ability to make a statement in private.  [4] the secrecy legally protects anyone who is implicated but not yet indicted. ”  A person who is suspected of having committed a crime is not protected by the constitutional prohibition of “double jeopardy” in this instance, because the person has not yet been “put in jeopardy” (made to stand trial).”  So in essence the Grand Jury still fulfils an important role in the US constitution and legal system.  This particularly so with actions regarding large Corporation who prefer arbitration for quick settlements as opposed to individual constitutional rights to be tried by a jury.