Grand Jury vs. Trial Jury

By Noralyn Dudt

A SUMMONS from Montgomery County Circuit Court to serve in the Grand Jury in 2018 surely came as a surprise. It has been 30 years since I requested the Montgomery County Court to remove my name from the jury pool as it was nearly impossible for me to leave my job if I were to be selected. In 2018, I was already semi-retired  and I had time to spare so receiving the summons was… well.... sort of exciting. The Jury Commissioner has a big list of potential jurors and I never imagined I would be among the 23. But just a day before the voir dire (jury selection), I was surprised to get a call from the Commissioner's office. She wanted to make sure that I would be at the Courthouse the next day.

What is a Grand Jury ? A Grand Jury is a group of citizens who are presented with evidence associated with a case and then determine if there is enough information to move forward on those charges based on the evidence presented to them. They are selected at random from a cross section of the citizens who reside within the jurisdiction where the case will be indicted. This cross section is drawn from voter registration as well as Motor Vehicle Administration lists, depending on the County where one resides. To be eligible for grand jury, one must be at least 18 years of age, a United States citizen, a state resident, able to read, write, and understand the English language. The grand jury derives its name from the fact that it usually has a greater number of jurors than a trial (petit) jury which has 12.

All 23 of us, a diverse group (a Black college student, a retired judge, a retired physician of Asian descent, several teachers, a physical therapist, dentists, a Naval officer, a newly-minted U.S. citizen of college-age from Eastern Europe) convened in the Grand Jury room in the Courthouse on Tuesdays and Thursdays for three months in the summer of  2018. On each morning that we signed in, we were given dockets that listed all the  cases we were going to review that day. Some days we had 15-20 cases to review and we would have to  postpone lunch until late afternoon. Chief Investigators, prosecutors and  witnesses who were summoned  came to the Grand Jury room to provide us information. The prosecutor along with the witnesses  presented evidence and arguments—arguments that may  persuade us, the grand jury to indict the suspect. We took notes, and asked questions. After they left the room, we discussed each case and voted whether probable cause, or prima facie evidence existed to charge someone with a crime. Montgomery County criminal cases are usually only indicted if the prosecutor has enough evidence to present to a grand jury. However, a grand jury also can conduct its own investigation.

One of the earliest concepts of  grand juries dates back to ancient Greece where Athenians used an accusatory body. In  medieval England, it was already  in use during the reign of Henry III (1216-72) It is distinctively a development of the common law (i.e., law based on judicial decisions, as evolved in England and the United States).

The Grand Jury can also be traced to the time of the Norman conquest of England  in 1066. There is evidence that the courts of that time summoned a body of sworn neighbors to present crimes that had come to their knowledge. Since the members of that accusing jury were selected from small jurisdictions, it was natural that they could present accusations based on their personal knowledge.

When the Grand Jury determines whether there is "probable cause"  that an individual has committed a crime, the case will be put on trial in the courtroom presided by a judge. To put it simply: a Grand Jury of 23 members who convene in a Grand Jury room without the presence of a judge, decide if someone should be charged with a crime, while a Trial Jury of 12 individuals   in the Courtroom in the presence of the judge and lawyers, decide after evidence offered during a trial, whether the accused or defendant is guilty.

In the courtroom, the presiding judge will tell the selected jurors about the case, and introduce them to the lawyers and others who are involved in the case. They also take an oath in which they promise to answer all questions truthfully.

Taking all that into account, one could ask, "what  are the advantages of having a Grand Jury ? As the Grand Jury is a constitutional requirement for certain types of crimes, it plays an important role in protecting citizens against unfounded criminal prosecutions. A group of law-abiding citizens who do not know the defendant can make an unbiased decision about the evidence before voting to charge an individual with a crime. In its investigative capacity,  a grand jury can subpoena documents and witnesses. Grand Jury proceedings are secret in accordance with Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures. No judge is present; the proceedings are led by a prosecutor and the defendant has no right to present his case or (in many instances) to be informed of the proceedings at all.

That jurors may lack legal knowledge is a constant criticism of the Grand Jury system. But in my experience with my  Grand Jury team in the summer of 2018, our "lack of legal knowledge" was compensated by the valuable information we received from the Chief Investigators, prosecutors and witnesses, and the diligence and care with what we did with that information: it was discussed, dissected and probed. We were careful not to send cases to the courts unnecessarily that could overwhelm the system. As we were also bussed as a group to Correctional facilities ( jails) and Rehabilitation centers, we saw firsthand how  first arrests were processed; how prisoners were allowed to take courses in the prison library by instructors from the county college; that prisoners were paid for some of the chores they were allowed to do in prison; how rehabilitation could work successfully for first time offenders and other details that we were supposed to know. The prisoners were allowed to share their grievances with us and the Court tasked us to make recommendations for improvement.

At the beginning of our Grand Jury session,  both the Chief Investigator and the prosecutors who were going to  present  details of the cases  and what the law said about them remarked, "by the end of these three months, you will have felt like you have gone to Law School and the apprenticeship in the Court."

And they were certainly right. It was a civic duty but it also taught us to be more appreciative of the fact that ordinary citizens have this voice in a democratic society.

 

Noralyn Onto Dudt wore Badge 15508284 during her  three-month Grand Jury term, and felt privileged to have been selected to perform a civic duty in this capacity.