Does a Grand Jury deliberate like a regular jury or decide then and there on the spot? Not sure how a GJ works.
Its not a guilty or not guilty sort of thing. The DA presents his evidence and they have to decide if there is enough for it to go to trial. If they feel like he has nothing then they say "getdefukottahere" and this is all behind us.
Depends on the jurors and what all they want to see or hear; but, IMO most likely they will. Hopefully they won't drag it out too long..... need to get these two young men out of limbo.
Interpreting DNA Test Results Three types of results can occur in DNA testing: inclusion, exclusion, and inconclusive. It is important that victim service providers understand the meaning of these terms and be able to explain their implications. INCLUSION: When the DNA profile of a victim or suspect is consistent with the DNA profile from the crime scene evidence, the individual is "included" as the possible source of that evidence. However, the strength of inclusion depends upon the number of loci (locations on the DNA strand) examined and how common or rare the resulting DNA profile is in the general population. EXCLUSION: When the DNA profile from a victim or suspect is inconsistent with the DNA profile generated from the crime scene evidence, the individual is "excluded" as the donor of the evidence. However, exclusion does not imply innoncent. In a rape case, for example, a perpetrator wearing a condom could be excluded as a suspect because no semen was found at the crime scene, but evidence found elsewhere at the crime scene may include that same person as a suspect. INCONCLUSIVE: Inconclusive results indicate that DNA testing could neither include NOR exclude an individual as the source of biological evidence. Inconclusive results can occur for many reasons: for example, the quality or quantity of DNA may be insufficient to produce interpretable results, or the evidentiary sample may contain a mixture of DNA from several individuals (e.g., a sample taken from a victim of a gang rape). As with all DNA testing results, additional testing may be needed and findings should be interpreted in the context of other evidence in the case.
i agree. we arent talking only about football. we are talking about the lives of two young men. a grand jury can make it snappy, they can drag it out. who knows what they will do. but this is a way for the da to try to save his ass politically by saying "the people have spoken" one way or another. talk about passing the buck.
Man ... you guys need to ease up on the BRPD. They were just doing their job. An incident occurred. Witnesses pinned Jefferson and Johns. They have a responsibiity to investigate fully. After the investigation, they take it to the GJ who decides if the evidence warrants going to trial. If there is not enough evidence, it doesn't go. I'm going to say that in this case, there are witness reports, the shoes produced no DNA, thus there is no inclusion or exclusion, and the print is circumstancial. The GJ will likely throw this thing out. JJ and Johns have their life back. But all in all, this is how the system works. It is how it is supposed to work, and you should be glad. Otherwise, we'd have innocent people being hanged all the time. The GJ is a safeguard against trials of innocent people, or in some cases, guilty people where there is not enough evidence to convict. You guys speak as if these guys are incompetent. I disagree. They'd be incompetent if they botched an investigation into a guilty party, but that's not what's happening here. It's more likely the system is going to work properly, and JJ and Johns go back to what they were doing before.
