Re: Almost humorous reading the posts
"A grand jury isn't just used to determine if a trial should be held, it's also used to determine if a trial SHOULD NOT be held.
Many times, a grand jury investigation shows the innocence of those connected with the case."
Wouldn't a non-secret hearing with the defendant able to challenge evidence be a better way to establish innocence? On this side of the pond we decided that and abandoned the institution. Instead the prosecution have to make up their minds as to whether they have a case.
Committal proceedings are held in open court with the accused able to challenge the prosecutions evidence. It serves the same end as that for which you praise the Grand Jury but is open and fair. It's more likely to achieve the end of deciding whether there shouldn't be a full trial than a secret one-sided, outmoded kangaroo court. Some of your non-citizens are quite familiar with the alternative; some of us have even taken part in that process. Some of us think that it's a more civilized option.