Under the Fifth Amendment, however, charges that carry potential penalties of more than a year in prison must be approved by a grand jury. At least 12 members must vote to authorize an indictment. After striking out with the D.C. grand jury, prosecutors dropped the effort to charge Reid with a felony and instead filed a misdemeanor charge that does not require grand jury approval. The maximum penalty for the misdemeanor is one year in jail.
Let me start by saying that I am not a lawyer, so if I’m wrong on anything here, I apologize and ask someone to correct me.
In DC, grand juries have 16 to 23 members. The evidence standard is “more likely than not” rather than “beyond a reasonable doubt” as it is in a regular criminal trial. That means these prosecutors failed to convince at least 5 members of the jury (assuming 16 members) that she was more likely than not to have committed the crime in question. If there were 23 members on that particular jury, at least 12 voted against indicting her. I have to wonder if it is the evidence that is so wanting or if there are just that many people on the jury who are resisting these fascist police actions. I suspect the former, but I hope it’s the latter. I’m interested to see how the misdemeanor trials go. I believe that in a regular criminal trial the jury must be unanimous to convict.
The sandwich thrower gives a possible answer. He didn’t get indicted, either, even though he’s on camera doing it.
Now, it’s not a slam dunk argument, because the grand jury only took up the question of whether throwing a sandwich at an armored federal officer constitutes felony assault. Misdemeanor assault will still happen. Even so, it’s a data point.
rand jury only took up the question of whether throwing a sandwich at an armored federal officer constitutes felony assault
Exactly. Felony assault would have different requirements. The evidence presented to the grand jury did not support the charge they were considering. The same evidence might support the charge of misdemeanor assault.
