University officials charged for hazing

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Okay, but I asked a judge about the difference and he said pretty much the same thing you did.

Suit is civil
Indictment is criminal

He basically said that an indictment is a suit of criminal intent of a crime. A grand jury is a panel where rights are thrown out. There must be a jury leader. Is this a judge?

Tom;
Please take the time to read the links in my earlier posting.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by James

What about that old adage that a DA can get an indictment on a ham sandwich?

As I said, "I recognize as well as anyone that grand juries make mistakes and that DAs may not present cases based in fact to grand juries." Most DAs I have run across, however, would never try to get an indictment on a ham sandwich.

Of course, I've never practiced law in New York, where the ham sandwich quip, first uttered by a subsequently disbarred judge, originated.

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

A grand jury is a panel where rights are thrown out. There must be a jury leader. Is this a judge?

I really have no clue what you mean when you say "a grand jury is a panel where rights are thrown out." It is not a grand jury's role to hear all of the evidence in a case or to decide guilt -- that responsibility belongs to the petit jury (the jury that actually hears a trial). The grand jury's role is simply to decide if the prosecutor has enough evidence to proceed with an indictment. If it determines that he does, then the purpose of the trial is to see how that evidence stacks up against other evidence and holds up to challenge.

Judges do not sit with grand juries, although they may occasionally be called in to rule on certain questions of things like privilege. As with petit juries, grand juries have foremen. In my jurisdiction, at least, the foreman is appointed by a judge.