From: Rabid Wombat <wombat@mcfeely.bsfs.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 02:18:01 +0800
To: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
Subject: Re: Elder Kennedy ordered to tesify to Grand Jury (if you can (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199811120446.WAA27641@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.981115125343.17485A-100000@mcfeely.bsfs.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Jim Choate wrote:

> Forwarded message:
> 
> > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 20:52:06 -0500
> > From: Petro <petro@playboy.com>
> > Subject: Re: Elder Kennedy ordered to tesify to Grand Jury (if you can
> >  call it that) [CNN] (fwd)
> 
> > 	Jim, "Grand Jury", a jury to see if there is enough evidence to
> > warrant a full trial.
> > 
> > >Irrelevant, one doesn't throw away the justice system because it might have
> > >been abused. One wrong does not justify another.
> > 
> > 	Correct, but this isn't a guilty or innocent trial, this is a "is
> > there enough evidence to try this person" type trial.
> > 
> > 	This judge can't throw the perp in jail, only throw another trial
> > where there will be 12 to judge.
> 

What part of Petro's response did you fail to understand? THe "elder 
Kennedy" is not on trail. A grand jury is convened to determine if enough 
evidence exists to bring trail. Those brought before a grand jury are 
almost always witnesses, or potential witnesses, as is the elder Kennedy.

A grand jury hearing and a criminal trail are two completely seperate 
processes. All the grand jury can do is determine whether or not to 
indite, whereupon the accused has the right to a fair trail before a jury 
as you state.

Anyway, the injustice in this matter is that the two most likely 
suspects, who were both dating the victim up to her death, have never 
been brought to trial. Just another abuse by america's "royal family."

The murder weapon was a golf club belonging to, as I recall, the father 
of one of the boys. Both boys were seen with her on the night of her 
death. No trial for over twenty years, plenty of expensive legal 
manuvering to prevent one. And now Jim complaining that a single judge is 
insufficient to determine if an inditement should be handed down.

Perhaps prof. Froomkin is reading the list and can pass on an informed 
legal opinion? I've never seen any regulations baring a judge from 
serving in the capacity of a grand jury, OTOH, IANAL.

-r.w.