 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Again from Grand Jury
It was in this period that the independence of the grand jury became established. No longer required to make known to the court the evidence upon which they acted, meeting in secret and sworn to keep their proceedings secret by an oath which contained no reservation in favor of the government, selected from the gentlemen of the best figure in the county,127 and without regard to their knowledge of any particular offence, the three centuries that followed the return of a panel of twenty-four knights, witnessed its freedom of action from all restraint by the court.
The independence which the institution had attained was soon to be put to the severest tests, but protected by the cloak of secrecy and free from the control of the court as to their findings, they successfully thwarted the unjust designs of the government.
It was in the reign of Charles the Second that we find the two most celebrated instances of the fearless action of the grand jury in defending the liberty of the subject, although subjected to the strongest possible pressure from the crown.
In 1 68 1 a bill of indictment for high treason against Stephen College, the Protestant joiner, was submitted to a grand jury of the City of London. Lord Chief Justice North compelled the grand jury to hear the evidence in open court and of the witnesses produced it was said, "It is certainly true that never men swore more firmly in court than they did." The grand jury demanded that .the witnesses be sent to them that they might examine them privately and apart, which the court permitted to be done.
After considering the matter for several hours the grand jury ignored the bill. Upon being asked by the Lord Chief Justice whether they would give a reason for this verdict, they replied that they had given their verdict ac cording to their consciences and would stand by it.128
The foreman of this grand jury, Mr. Wilmore, was afterwards apprehended upon a false charge, examined before the Council, sent to the tower, and afterward forced to flee beyond the seas.129
And
In the same year an attempt was made to indict the Earl of Shaftesbury for high treason.130 As in College's case, the grand jury desired to hear the evidence in private, but the king's counsel insisted that the evidence be heard in open court and Lord Chief Justice Pemberton assented.
After hearing the evidence the grand jury desired that they might examine the witnesses apart in their chamber and the court granted the request. After again hearing the witnesses and considering their verdict they returned the bill "ignoramus," upon which "the people fell a hollowing and a shouting."
This case is perhaps pointed out more often than any other as an in stance of the independent action of the grand jury, and while it is not sought to minimize the action of the grand jurors, for their stand was a bold one in view of the strong pressure which was brought to bear upon them by the crown, still the side lights when thrown upon it disclose other facts which may have been potent in shaping the return of this body.131
The Earl of Shaftesbury was a very powerful nobleman, with influential friends and adherents in the king's service, but his greatest strength, perhaps, lay in the regard in which he was held by the people. The sheriff who returned the grand jurors before whom the case was laid, was an open adherent of Shaftesbury,and it is reasonable to assume that the panel was composed wholly of those whose sympathies were inclined toward the Earl.132 It is not strange, therefore, that the proceeding by the crown should meet with an ignominious defeat.
Notes in the work above:
132 Earl of Shaftesbury's Case, 8 How. St. Tr. 775. The following ex cerpt from the report of the proceedings shows the attitude of the sheriff toward the Earl :
Sheriff P. I desire the witnesses may be kept out of court, and called one by one.
L. C. J. It is a thing certainly, the king's counsel will not be afraid of doing; but sheriffs do not use to move anything of this nature in court, and therefore 'tis not your duty, Mr. Sheriff, to meddle with it.
Sheriff P. It was my duty last time my lord, and appointed. Att. Gen. (Sir Robert Sawyer). You were acquainted 'twas not your duty last time, and you appear against the king.
My notes: What happened to random selection of jurors from a pool? Was this more of the same "closing of gates after the horses have left the corral"?