Jewish World Review April 23, 2004 / 2 Iyar 5764
So what exactly is an indictment? Making sense of the latest Jacko court thriller
People are probably saying to themselves that they thought Michael Jackson was already indicted. Yes, charges were filed by the prosecutors. But now a grand jury has handed up an indictment. What does that mean?
A GRAND JURY
An indictment means that a grand jury, composed of 19 citizens, evaluated the evidence presented by the prosecution, and at least 12 of them have come back and said that there was probable cause to believe that Michael Jackson committed these crimes.
A prosecutor filing charges is not enough in the state of California. He or she has to go one of two ways to a grand jury or a preliminary hearing.
The prosecutor decided to go through a secret grand jury, where it's just the prosecution presenting evidence, and no defense attorneys present. There is no cross-examination either.
An indictment is really not a huge legal hurdle. Many experts will tell you that is not tough to get a grand jury indictment.
The grand jury is effectively an arm of the prosecution. Sometimes there are even investigative grand juries, where prosecutors convene a grand jury just to force witnesses to come in and testify.
There were 19 grand jurors in the Jackson case. They can ask questions and ask for certain witnesses, unlike a regular jury. Some grand juries are considered more professional juries than are regular juries. They are impaneled for 90 days, although now that this grand jury's work is over, they will almost certainly be disbanded.
WHAT ARE THE CHARGES AGAINST JACKSON?
It was not a big surprise that Michael Jackson was indicted, although we don't know exactly which charges Jackson's been indicted on. All the proceedings in front of this grand jury are secret.
The grand jury could indict on all the charges that the prosecution presented, or they could indict on more (or less) charges than the ones the prosecution presented. All we've been able to confirm at this point is that Michael Jackson has been indicted by a grand jury.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The only shot that the defense really has in a California grand jury and this is more than in most states is that the prosecutor is obliged by law to present exculpatory evidence, meaning evidence that helps Michael Jackson.
After about 10 days, the defense is going to get an opportunity to review the entire transcript of the grand jury. You can expect that these defense attorneys are going to challenge that these prosecutors did not present enough of the exculpatory evidence to this grand jury.
They will likely also have challenges to the way that this grand jury was conducted. We know that over a period of days, there was testimony in front of this grand jury from a psychologist, an attorney who represented the boy and his mother, the accuser himself, the brother of the accuser, the father of the accuser, and the mother of the accuser. There may also have been more witnesses.
But this was expected. And it certainly looks like Michael Jackson is now going to trial.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington
and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor Dan Abrams anchors The Abrams Report, Monday through Friday from 9-10 p.m. ET on MSNBC TV. He also covers legal stories for NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, Today and Dateline NBC. To visit his website, click here. Comment by clicking here.
04/22/04: A pathetic attempt by some defense attorneys to blame the attorney general for their clients' arrests
04/21/04: The terrorists who have succeeded get most of the attention, but there are plenty of them who have failed
04/19/04: Arab media demonizing U.S. troops
04/15/04: A New York judge found not guilty of drunk driving still needs a major credibility check
04/14/04: The release of the August 6, 2001 PDB shouldn't change anything in the blame game
04/11/04: 9/11 Commission should be accepted, no matter what it finds
04/09/04: Making the Enron mess worse
04/08/04: Why was a mistrial granted in the Tyco case? We deserve to know why the legal system failed
04/05/04: Can 'Runaway Jury' be real? So-called "stealth jurors" could be sabotaging the justice system
04/02/04: Judge on trial for drunk driving will likely remain on the bench even if convicted
03/26/04: Those trying to place blame for 9/11 are taking political cheap shots
03/18/04: Palestinian terrorists are using children where's the outrage?
03/15/04: Let's fight the common enemy
03/12/04: Lawsuits against fast food companies are ridiculous
03/09/04: In Martha case, justice was served, but it wasn't exactly fair
03/05/04: Martha's celebrity friends visit the courtroom: Were they trying to send a message to the jurors?
03/03/04: Bravo to the Israeli Supreme Court
03/02/04: When prosecutors overcharge: Seeing what will stick is not the way to go
02/27/04: Our warped perception of TV: Are you willing to watch a televised execution?
02/24/04: Why term limits for district attorneys make no sense and why voters should have more confidence in themselves to vote out someone they don't like
02/23/04: Why Martha Stewart shouldn't testify
02/17/04: We need to get over O.J.
02/13/04: Why safety and security have to take precedence over certain environmental concerns
02/02/04: Not the celebrity circus: Why all high profile trials are not created equal
01/27/04: To Kobe and Michael: Playing the race card would be a mistake
01/26/04: Closed jury selection at the Martha Stewart trial makes sense
01/24/04: Being more frugal with the death penalty: Getting it right, more important than getting it often
01/15/04: Stupid warning labels: The death of common sense and responsibility
01/14/04: Because 9/11 did change America: New government proposal on airline screening seems fair
01/13/04: Jury of one's peers: Not to be taken literally
01/09/04: When the truth hurts, lawyers try to close proceedings
01/08/04: Lies, damn lies and those that don't seem to matter
01/07/04: Convicted child murderer's mommy should start accepting some responsibility for son's fate
12/17/03: It's time to stop assuming that the Iraqi people can't fairly try Saddam Hussein
12/15/03: Why the case of 16-year-old convicted murderer highlights the problem with some defense attorneys, to whom the truth is sometimes beside the point
12/11/03: Tweaking Miranda
12/10/03: Why the accused in "Central Park jogger" case aren't falsely accused angels
12/08/03: Lawyers blaming the media
11/20/03: Why it's time to throw out the insanity defense, as we know it
11/14/03: What happens when jurors leave their common sense at the door?
11/13/03: Are the Brits finally learning that the risks of suppressing or banning speech are greater than allowing it and then punishing the violators?
11/12/03: Fairer fare
11/06/03: Why so-called no-nonsense judges sometimes put up with a lot of nonsense
10/23/03: Why the presumption of innocence does not and should not exist outside a courtroom
10/22/03: College kid (in)security maven deserves country's gratitude
10/21/03: If you don't like it, you can drive
10/17/03: Blurring the line in the Kobe Bryant case between what is significant and what is just salacious
10/16/03: Why prosecutors and the judge shouldn't let Kobe's lawyer hijack the preliminary hearing
10/15/03: False bravado from the mayor of New York
10/13/03: The media circus myth
10/10/03: Angry electorate?
10/07/03: Why a recent ruling in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker is no cause for concern
10/02/03: Children, guns and political fear
10/01/03: Why you should hold off on thanking politicians for passing and signing the national do-not-call list
09/30/03: A star Ohio State running back is suing to become eligible for the NFL draft
09/25/03: The effort by some law schools to keep military recruiters off their campuses
09/23/03: What a hurricane can teach us about dealing with terrorism
09/22/03: Why I'm tired of criminal defense attorneys in particular in high profile cases complaining about media leaks
09/18/03: How budget cuts nationwide are starving many of the state courts and allowing some criminals to go free
09/17/03: Charging wounded soldiers for food!?
09/16/03: al Qaeda has finally found a media home
09/15/03: Journalists who exposed security threat, now being punished?
08/14/03: The California student council blue light special election
08/13/03: Why the Transportation Security Administration needs to start getting it's priorities straight
08/12/03: Let local U.S. attorneys do their jobs
08/07/03: Why itís time to release the documents surrounding Kobe Bryantís arrest
08/06/03: Terror warnings do serve a purpose
08/03/03: How even the most pro-Saudi polls still make many of the Saudi people seem like enemies of America
08/01/03: Why is the outgoing president of one of the most influential legal organizations advising attorneys not to represent certain clients?
07/31/03: Class action lawyers get huge fees while their clients get squat
07/30/03: Why it makes no sense to keep the public and the victims in the dark about a key section of the 9/11 report from Congress
03/27/03: Homeland Security update
03/20/03: Did I misunderstand the French?
03/18/03: No longer shielded from reality
03/17/03: Franco-phobic nonsense sweeping the nation
03/14/03: An exception to my "be extra tough on terrorists" rule
03/13/03: Whiner Assad still doesn't get it
03/11/03: What a new deadline for Iraq should really mean
03/10/03: The dishonest arguments against war with Iraq
03/07/03: On Iraq, the administration seems undeterred. It seems, there is no other way out
03/05/03: The so-called human shields in Iraq, now coming back from Fantasyland
03/04/03: Michigan backing off of mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug crimes
03/03/03: Why military tribunals could be the best optione of defining them as military
02/28/03: Is prez signaling a return to the American Bar Association ratings for prospective judicial candidates?
02/26/03: And now the "don't-blame-me" attitude is extending to mass deaths
02/10/03: Avoid politicizing the shuttle disaster
01/29/03: A litany of violations? That Saddam has not disarmed is already a given
01/23/03: Why the feds should not give up on the prosecution of alleged 20th hijacker in a federal court
01/22/03: What was Powell thinking?
01/21/03: Human rights groups still don't get it when it comes to the new war on terror
01/16/03: Yet another reason why we shouldn't trust the Saudis
01/13/03: Why the administration should share intelligence with U.N. inspectors
01/10/03: From a special punishment to a garden variety one
01/08/03: Should victims of a terror attack sue the city?
01/06/03: The "Jackpot Jury" syndrome continues
12/30/02: It's the holidays, let me order my wine!
12/20/02: The judge who dropped the ball in the battle over who owns Barry Bonds' 73rd home run ball, valued at nearly $2 million
12/19/02: Requiring Pakistani and Saudi male visitors to register with the INS
12/18/02: Why many seem to misunderstand Iraq's international obligations
12/17/02: Shouldn't there be a standard for what would trigger a war with Iraq?
12/13/02: Judge Rose by what he did on the field
12/12/02: Manhattan prosecutors making a mistake in the Central Park jogger case
12/11/02: Why our government refuses to fully cooperate in the prosecution of a possible 9/11 conspirator
12/10/02: Hezbollah, not a terrorist organization, says Canada
12/09/02: The world's cynical view of America
12/04/02: Why we need to stop electing judges
11/27/02: Why men should be able to sue women who lie about who's the daddy
11/26/02: Training lawyers to be touchy-feely
11/25/02: The story of a real American hero
11/22/02: In Illinois, academics lawyers, judges hurting their pro-life cause
11/15/02: A close reading of Iraq's letter of acceptance makes it clear that Saddam will almost certainly refuse to live up to its terms
11/14/02: Al Jazeera: A state-sponsored mouth-piece
11/13/02: Should Moussaoui be sent to a military tribunal?
11/12/02: Should human rights activists complain about the detainees' treatment?
© 2002, MSNBC