# Should Grand Jury testimony be secret? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 12, 2005, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-grand-jury-testimony-be-secret/325835 "2005-10-12T02:16:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2005, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-grand-jury-testimony-be-secret/325835/1 "2005-10-12T02:16:54Z")
Inspired by a radio report from CBS News heard on the way home from work, and augmented by > [@squeegee's](#): > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=339323#post6675846](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=339323#post6675846) thread, I have some questions about Grand Juries. From what I understand of Grand Juries, they’re brought in by a prosecutor for certain crimes to determine the merit of a case and whether or not they have the substance to bring about a trial for a crime. That’s the simplified understanding, please clarify if needed. Now then, the report stated DeLay’s attorney is trying to question the Grand Jury to get some information on the reason to indict him. (Tom) The reason for the motion (or whatever it’s called) is to find out the process the prosecutor followed in getting the indictment. I’d mention in 800-point bold text I’m not taking a stance here, but that may not matter. So leave the politics at the door please. DeLay’s lawyer wants the secret Grand Jury proceedings made public so he can question the process. Seems reasonable, no matter who is being accused, and here’s why. When someone is facing a serious crime, why shouldn’t the defendant’s lawyer be privvy to the process that got his client to the defendant’s table to begin with? If Grand Jury proceedings are secret, it seems like there is a system in place to set the deck, as it were, to get the trial going. How is a “secret” process, inscrutible to the legal process. (Yes I came up with 18 Gitmo jokes about this, not applicable here) The only reason I can see for GJ’s being secret is fear of retaliation. Ever hear of the Mob taking care of GJ’s? But the basic idea is still held by me. If you want to bring a serious charge against someone, and you want to follow the law of disclosure, etc., shouldn’t all proceedings related to trying the person be made available to the defense? Going back to the Mob, who’s to say the judge and prosecutor aren’t swaying things to thier side? It seems to me that anything involved with a person’s criminal defense against charges that are brought against him under applicable law and rights, should have a representative at every step of the way. Long winded, maybe, but I’d still like to know. Why would a GJ proceeding be secret. Also, am I just all wet on my understanding of Grand Juries? ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2005, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-grand-jury-testimony-be-secret/325835/2 "2005-10-12T02:18:42Z")
And, of course, I screw up yet another attempt at coding. It seems decipherable, but report it if it would be better for the thread. Thanks ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-grand-jury-testimony-be-secret/325835/3 "2005-10-12T14:12:10Z")
Here is the rationale for grand jury secrecy set forth by the ABA: > [@](#): > > Secrecy was originally designed to protect the grand jurors from improper pressures. The modern justifications are to prevent the escape of people whose indictment may be contemplated, to ensure that the grand jury is free to deliberate without outside pressure, to prevent subornation of perjury or witness tampering prior to a subsequent trial, to encourage people with information about a crime to speak freely, and to protect the innocent accused from disclosure of the fact that he or she was under investigation. To clarify the role of a grand jury: > [@](#): > > _by duffer_ > From what I understand of Grand Juries, they’re brought in by a prosecutor for certain crimes to determine the merit of a case and whether or not they have the substance to bring about a trial for a crime. That’s the simplified understanding, please clarify if needed. Again from the ABA: > [@](#): > > The primary function of the modern grand jury is to review the evidence presented by the prosecutor and determine whether there is probable cause to return an indictment. > > The original purpose of the grand jury was to act as a buffer between the king (and his prosecutors) and the citizens. Critics argue that this safeguarding role has been erased, and the grand jury simply acts as a rubber stamp for the prosecutor. > > Since the role of the grand jury is only to determine probable cause, there is no need for the jury to hear all the evidence, or even conflicting evidence. It is left to the good faith of the prosecutor to present conflicting evidence. It is important to note that a grand jury’s role is not to determine guilt, or even likelihood of guilt. Probable cause is a pretty low standard. From Black’s Law Dictionary: > [@](#): > > Probable cause. A resonable ground to _suspect_ that a person has committed a crime or is committing a crime. Note “suspect”. The standard is not even “believe”. Sua