Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > Law Enforcement

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 6 January 2018, 00:46
bobofthedesert's Avatar
bobofthedesert bobofthedesert is offline
RIP SOTB, Cass, Hognose
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Middle of the Mojave
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akheloce View Post
I feel that I obeyed the instructions as I understand them, but I see your point. I'll STFU.
"If there's any doubt there is no doubt."
__________________
RIP Stevie D. 1964-2012
U.S. Army Veteran of OIF 2003
"Gone But Never Forgotten"

"In Flanders fields the poppies blow
between the crosses, row on row...."
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 6 January 2018, 08:46
8654maine 8654maine is offline
Another pool cleaner
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Maine
Posts: 4,396
Help from the experts here: Grand jury role is to assist the prosecutor on charging a suspect, yes?
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 6 January 2018, 09:37
Five-O's Avatar
Five-O Five-O is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 1,059
In general terms...GJ's look into the validity of accusations/charges prior to a trial. GJ help determine if charges go forward. Note the difference between GJ and a trial jury. * I'm not an expert.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 6 January 2018, 10:06
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
I was a prosecutor who ran grand juries for three years many years ago. You and the rest of the grand jurors will be over that ask a million questions phase sooner than you think.
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 6 January 2018, 10:52
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8654maine View Post
Help from the experts here: Grand jury role is to assist the prosecutor on charging a suspect, yes?
I don't consider myself an expert on anything - but here is a pretty good explanation:



http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/jury/grandhandbook.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 6 January 2018, 11:03
8654maine 8654maine is offline
Another pool cleaner
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Maine
Posts: 4,396
Thanks.

FKL, that is a great read on the grand jury.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 6 January 2018, 15:31
Olive Drab's Avatar
Olive Drab Olive Drab is offline
Walk the plank
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Beltway
Posts: 1,348
Don't be "that guy" on the grand jury who watched too much CSI and NCIS and likes to sharp shoot with unrealistic questions that irrelevant to the indictment. The witnesses, prosecutor, and other jurors don't appreciate that nonsense.
__________________
9.11.01
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 6 January 2018, 18:09
Whitebean54's Avatar
Whitebean54 Whitebean54 is offline
Time is a flat circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 3rd world in the 1st world
Posts: 2,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olive Drab View Post
Don't be "that guy" on the grand jury who watched too much CSI and NCIS and likes to sharp shoot with unrealistic questions that irrelevant to the indictment. The witnesses, prosecutor, and other jurors don't appreciate that nonsense.
But cops are stupid and it should be pointed out at every possible chance.
__________________
"Somewhere, theres a skeleton, a book sack and a log with a fat girls signature " Jumpcut

" a world class ass-clown who is running this jack-assery version of laser tag" USMC_ANGLICO
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 6 January 2018, 19:36
Massgrunt's Avatar
Massgrunt Massgrunt is offline
Policeman Officer
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Day shift.
Posts: 12,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitebean54 View Post
But cops are stupid and it should be pointed out at every possible chance.
Truly, this is the most important part of the process. The poster has been given a rare opportunity.
__________________
"The real problem was being able to stick it out, to sit in an office under the orders of a wee man in a dark gray suit and look out of the window and recall the bush country, the waving palms, the smell of sweat and cordite, the grunts of the men hauling jeeps over the river crossings, the copper-tasting fears just before the attack, and the wild, cruel joy of being alive afterward. To remember, and then go back to the ledgers and the commuter train, that was impossible. He knew he would eat his heart out if it ever came to that."

- "The Dogs of War" by Frederick Forsyth
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 6 January 2018, 21:07
bobofthedesert's Avatar
bobofthedesert bobofthedesert is offline
RIP SOTB, Cass, Hognose
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Middle of the Mojave
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitebean54 View Post
But cops are stupid and it should be pointed out at every possible chance.
The 90% pay for the sins of the 10% every day, and IMHO this is just another example of how that is true. "Trickle down." I'm not saying it's right, just that it "is". Screening that is done along the lines of what other have already posted about pre-employment investigations is one way, and seems to be the easiest, but ruthless turfing of people that the guys already there (FTO, etc.) find to be wanting (and I'm talking about real issues, not popularity contests) so as to avoid those YouTube vids that cost millions in dollars and reputation is another. You have to be SEEN to be taking care of your business, and the "1 negative to 10 positives" thing is going to work against you even then. Low profile for this doesn't work, the more members of the public know it happened the better. Not necessarily names, but "6 officers were let go last year for failure to maintain standard"/"peered out", how can that be a bad thing?

An uphill battle I'll grant you. One more reason why LE work is not for the faint of heart or those not built for it. Those two things should be up for review throughout a career, some people have 30 good years in them, others not so much....

I'll be attending the retirement ceremony in March of a good friend who has 41 years in uniform, Mil/LE to his credit. A more decent man doesn't exist in my personal experience. If you could clone that dude the problem would be over, and every time I read about the most recent outrage, I deliberately balance my feelings with the character of his service.
__________________
RIP Stevie D. 1964-2012
U.S. Army Veteran of OIF 2003
"Gone But Never Forgotten"

"In Flanders fields the poppies blow
between the crosses, row on row...."
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 6 January 2018, 22:09
Whitebean54's Avatar
Whitebean54 Whitebean54 is offline
Time is a flat circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 3rd world in the 1st world
Posts: 2,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobofthedesert View Post
The 90% pay for the sins of the 10% every day, and IMHO this is just another example of how that is true. "Trickle down." I'm not saying it's right, just that it "is". Screening that is done along the lines of what other have already posted about pre-employment investigations is one way, and seems to be the easiest, but ruthless turfing of people that the guys already there (FTO, etc.) find to be wanting (and I'm talking about real issues, not popularity contests) so as to avoid those YouTube vids that cost millions in dollars and reputation is another. You have to be SEEN to be taking care of your business, and the "1 negative to 10 positives" thing is going to work against you even then. Low profile for this doesn't work, the more members of the public know it happened the better. Not necessarily names, but "6 officers were let go last year for failure to maintain standard"/"peered out", how can that be a bad thing?

An uphill battle I'll grant you. One more reason why LE work is not for the faint of heart or those not built for it. Those two things should be up for review throughout a career, some people have 30 good years in them, others not so much....

I'll be attending the retirement ceremony in March of a good friend who has 41 years in uniform, Mil/LE to his credit. A more decent man doesn't exist in my personal experience. If you could clone that dude the problem would be over, and every time I read about the most recent outrage, I deliberately balance my feelings with the character of his service.
Has nothing to do with the 10/90%. The OP asked a question and insinuated that the officer was a Shitbag because he couldn't answer some "simple questions". Was he the primary officer? How many arrests had the officer made for the same offense since this case? Did happen the night before and had been upd 20-24 hours or more? Etc..... Like MassGrunt said, everybody thinks they are fucking Perry Mason..... Neato
__________________
"Somewhere, theres a skeleton, a book sack and a log with a fat girls signature " Jumpcut

" a world class ass-clown who is running this jack-assery version of laser tag" USMC_ANGLICO
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 6 January 2018, 22:12
Agoge Agoge is online now
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 6,888
One of the biggest misunderstandings concerning GJ’s is that they are “not” court. That needs to be advised by the DA or ADA at the beginning of their proceedings once they are seated. I have encountered the Perry Mason types that were going to teach me something. It never ends well for them.
__________________
People do not lack strength; they lack will.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 7 January 2018, 03:12
bobofthedesert's Avatar
bobofthedesert bobofthedesert is offline
RIP SOTB, Cass, Hognose
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Middle of the Mojave
Posts: 3,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitebean54 View Post
Has nothing to do with the 10/90%. The OP asked a question and insinuated that the officer was a Shitbag because he couldn't answer some "simple questions". Was he the primary officer? How many arrests had the officer made for the same offense since this case? Did happen the night before and had been upd 20-24 hours or more? Etc..... Like MassGrunt said, everybody thinks they are fucking Perry Mason..... Neato
I was suggesting that negativity towards LEO's was at least part of the foundation of the insinuation you reference, and that this negativity has roots elsewhere.

But yeah, grand juror for a day doing a Perry Mason. I do get that. LOL.
__________________
RIP Stevie D. 1964-2012
U.S. Army Veteran of OIF 2003
"Gone But Never Forgotten"

"In Flanders fields the poppies blow
between the crosses, row on row...."
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 7 January 2018, 03:18
bobofthedesert's Avatar
bobofthedesert bobofthedesert is offline
RIP SOTB, Cass, Hognose
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Middle of the Mojave
Posts: 3,827
double post
__________________
RIP Stevie D. 1964-2012
U.S. Army Veteran of OIF 2003
"Gone But Never Forgotten"

"In Flanders fields the poppies blow
between the crosses, row on row...."
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 7 January 2018, 10:28
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitebean54 View Post
Has nothing to do with the 10/90%. The OP asked a question and insinuated that the officer was a Shitbag because he couldn't answer some "simple questions". Was he the primary officer? How many arrests had the officer made for the same offense since this case? Did happen the night before and had been upd 20-24 hours or more? Etc..... Like MassGrunt said, everybody thinks they are fucking Perry Mason..... Neato
I am going to respectfully disagree. I have been before G.J.s as a LEO and handled them as a prosecutor. There have been times I had an agent come in and present a couple cases that the agent hadn't investigated himself. Happens all the time, because hearsay is not an issue at the G.J.

The government has the burden to establish p/c for each and every element of the offense. Even in cases where the agent hadn't actually handled the case himself, he knew where to look in the report and provide the info. If the LEO who worked the case didn't fully ID the firearm by make, model, cal and serial number, then he didn't do his/her job. And if the prosecuting attorney didn't go over testimony in advance, then it was an ill prepared case.

I was as guilty as every LEO wanting to come in and state a conclusion, rather than the facts the led to the conclusion. One way satisfies the requirements of law, the other does not. The prosecutor should have insured the LEO was prepared to do that.

Facts v Conclusions (from the movie Dirty Harry)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu_LCNLillU


Mayor: (calls out) Callahan.Insp.
Harry Callahan: Sir?
Mayor: I don't want any more trouble like you had last year in the Fillmore District. Understand? That's my policy.
Insp. Harry Callahan: Yeah, well, when an adult male is chasing a female with intent to commit rape, I shoot the bastard; that's my policy.
Mayor: Intent? How did you establish that?
Insp. Harry Callahan: When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross.
Mayor: [after Callahan has left] I think he's got a point.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 7 January 2018, 12:44
Whitebean54's Avatar
Whitebean54 Whitebean54 is offline
Time is a flat circle
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 3rd world in the 1st world
Posts: 2,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fu King Lawyer View Post
I am going to respectfully disagree. I have been before G.J.s as a LEO and handled them as a prosecutor. There have been times I had an agent come in and present a couple cases that the agent hadn't investigated himself. Happens all the time, because hearsay is not an issue at the G.J.

The government has the burden to establish p/c for each and every element of the offense. Even in cases where the agent hadn't actually handled the case himself, he knew where to look in the report and provide the info. If the LEO who worked the case didn't fully ID the firearm by make, model, cal and serial number, then he didn't do his/her job. And if the prosecuting attorney didn't go over testimony in advance, then it was an ill prepared case.

I was as guilty as every LEO wanting to come in and state a conclusion, rather than the facts the led to the conclusion. One way satisfies the requirements of law, the other does not. The prosecutor should have insured the LEO was prepared to do that.

Facts v Conclusions (from the movie Dirty Harry)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu_LCNLillU


Mayor: (calls out) Callahan.Insp.
Harry Callahan: Sir?
Mayor: I don't want any more trouble like you had last year in the Fillmore District. Understand? That's my policy.
Insp. Harry Callahan: Yeah, well, when an adult male is chasing a female with intent to commit rape, I shoot the bastard; that's my policy.
Mayor: Intent? How did you establish that?
Insp. Harry Callahan: When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross.
Mayor: [after Callahan has left] I think he's got a point.
Fu King Lawyer,
I agree with what you say regarding grands juries. I do not believe the OPs motivations for posting.

I understand Hearsay on GJs. I been the trooper who came back and shot the scene with surveying equipment so is could be reconstructed in a CAD program later on(scene/crash reconstruction). One of the Grand Jury members asked me what the VIN was on the 3rd vehicle in the crash. He and I both had the full report in front of us. Why was he asking that? No clue, the prosecutor was confused as shit too. He just wanted to see if I knew. I wasn't on scene for the investigation. I was merely a small part of the investigation days later, after the vehicles had been towed away.


I don't belive the OP was refering to the cop jumping to conclusions, his entire first post read like "stump the chump". Which I take issue with. Every cop thread now has turned into "muh cops suck". Even the thread about the two cops not smoking the dude that wanted sucide by cop has a few posts in there taking jabs at LE. Are cops perfect, a resounding hell no is the answer. But it's tiresome to open almost every thread and have it devolve into "police misconduct 3.0".

Maybe I'm more annoyed regarding this because I was at a charity event last night for a cop that had been shot in the head twice. Having to have a fucking charity event to pay your medical bills because the insurance company isn't paying for whatever reason.
__________________
"Somewhere, theres a skeleton, a book sack and a log with a fat girls signature " Jumpcut

" a world class ass-clown who is running this jack-assery version of laser tag" USMC_ANGLICO
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 7 January 2018, 14:25
Fu King Lawyer Fu King Lawyer is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ...
Posts: 1,055
WB54,
Sorry about your friend. I mean it. If you have a go fund me, please advise?
I have seen GJs with too much CSI time asking nonsense questions - and had to explain why TV is fantasy. But when a GJ asks a question that constitutes the same info as needed for a ATF firearms trace, I feel the question is reasonable, the info should be in the report, and is one that should simply be answered. Normally the questions are based upon motives other than an attempt to undermine the case.
I read the OP and felt that both the LEO and the prosecutor were not prepared - and if they were not, the suggestion to come better prepared is well taken.
v/r
fkl
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 7 January 2018, 15:38
Akheloce Akheloce is offline
Six Minutes!
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 398
FKL Nailed it.
__________________
RIP Sitka 43 and ICY 33

Seven … six … eleven … five … nine-an’-twenty mile today
Four … eleven … seventeen … thirty-two the day before —
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 7 January 2018, 19:21
eoddude eoddude is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 342
FKL
I am not sure what you are saying.
It seems you are giving the impression that a GJ can return a true bill based on hearsay???
I am probably not clear on this.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 7 January 2018, 19:51
Massgrunt's Avatar
Massgrunt Massgrunt is offline
Policeman Officer
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Day shift.
Posts: 12,011
Hearsay is admissible during grand juries.
__________________
"The real problem was being able to stick it out, to sit in an office under the orders of a wee man in a dark gray suit and look out of the window and recall the bush country, the waving palms, the smell of sweat and cordite, the grunts of the men hauling jeeps over the river crossings, the copper-tasting fears just before the attack, and the wild, cruel joy of being alive afterward. To remember, and then go back to the ledgers and the commuter train, that was impossible. He knew he would eat his heart out if it ever came to that."

- "The Dogs of War" by Frederick Forsyth
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:12.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
SOCNET