Isn't there a DOJ policy NOT to present indictments to successive grand juries, absent additional inculpatory evidence? Former federal prosecutor here, but it's been a few years. Of course, "policy" can change, as we've seen.
The official policy is only that it requires approval of the responsible U.S. Attorney - which of course here was easy to obtain. There is no requirement of new evidence. See the Justice Manual, 9-11.120(A).
I don't disagree with anything you say, but would add that it's a bad idea, and illegal, to get physical with ICE or the FBI or the police. Protest is one thing, and under ordinary circumstances is legal. Allowing yourself to get carried away like these misdemeanants did crosses the line.
I don’t think anyone believes there’s even an altercation. They’re now just making sh1t up. Any time they don’t have evidence of a crime, their new go-to strategy is to say that in the “scuffle” (when they jumped on someone with no due process) the person allegedly “struck back.” This is one big reason they’re failing to indict: It doesn’t pass the bullsh1t test. As the author says, this is exactly why we have grand juries, as a check against authoritarianism.
Isn't there a DOJ policy NOT to present indictments to successive grand juries, absent additional inculpatory evidence? Former federal prosecutor here, but it's been a few years. Of course, "policy" can change, as we've seen.
The official policy is only that it requires approval of the responsible U.S. Attorney - which of course here was easy to obtain. There is no requirement of new evidence. See the Justice Manual, 9-11.120(A).
Excellent, Randall. Thanks!
Sorry for the multiple replies! There was a technical issue on my end. This page is buggy.
I don't disagree with anything you say, but would add that it's a bad idea, and illegal, to get physical with ICE or the FBI or the police. Protest is one thing, and under ordinary circumstances is legal. Allowing yourself to get carried away like these misdemeanants did crosses the line.
I don’t think anyone believes there’s even an altercation. They’re now just making sh1t up. Any time they don’t have evidence of a crime, their new go-to strategy is to say that in the “scuffle” (when they jumped on someone with no due process) the person allegedly “struck back.” This is one big reason they’re failing to indict: It doesn’t pass the bullsh1t test. As the author says, this is exactly why we have grand juries, as a check against authoritarianism.