A federal grand jury indicted Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan Tuesday, in connection to
a case that began against her in April over an immigration hearing.
Grand juries are entirely one sided. The prosecutor tries to convince the jury. There is no defense. There is no one there to dispute anything the prosecutor says.
There’s a saying that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich. Grand juries aren’t an effective barrier to frivolous law enforcement. Any prosecutor can convince a grand jury on anything. Those who can’t, don’t stay prosecutors for long.
It gives the facade of public input but the prosecutor is who controls the show and writes the narrative. The opposite example of this is all the cops who are never held accountable for their crimes because prosecutors decide to only show evidence exhonerating them, the grand jury comes back deciding not to indict, and these sleazeballs then point to the process and say “justice in action!”
While arresting judges is fucked up, the fact that this is a grand jury implies that the public had a part in deciding if the case should continue no?
Of course they could have gotten lucky with a full maga jury knowing how many troglodytes are in this country…
Grand juries are entirely one sided. The prosecutor tries to convince the jury. There is no defense. There is no one there to dispute anything the prosecutor says.
There’s a saying that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich. Grand juries aren’t an effective barrier to frivolous law enforcement. Any prosecutor can convince a grand jury on anything. Those who can’t, don’t stay prosecutors for long.
That’s the second time in this thread I read about a ham sandwich and I’m getting so hungry. Stop it!
Harm Always Manifests Soon After Notorious Dictators Willfully Illegally Charge Heros.
Well that’s not great…
Now that you mentioned it, I do actually recall hearing that saying. No bueno…
It gives the facade of public input but the prosecutor is who controls the show and writes the narrative. The opposite example of this is all the cops who are never held accountable for their crimes because prosecutors decide to only show evidence exhonerating them, the grand jury comes back deciding not to indict, and these sleazeballs then point to the process and say “justice in action!”
It implies that the prosecutors got to select the group of people tasked with deciding whether or not to indict.
This is not a trial jury voting to convict, but a grand jury deciding that the case can go to trial.
thats how they choose jurors stupid enough to vote one way or another, they dont want actually educated jurors for the most part.