Paul Grant Quote

"Voir dire was supposed to guarantee the defendant a fair and neutral jury, but instead they’re using it to “clean up” the juries (and get rid of) those opposed to the court’s policies. They don’t want an independent jury. They believe it’s their jury. ... [T]he way they’re using voir dire now, starts jurors thinking, “Is there anything that would make me hesitate to convict?” "

by:	Paul Grant Colorado trial attorney
Source:	quoted by Vin Suprynowski, Juror on trial, The Post Dispatch, September 5, 1996, p. 5.
Rating:
Categories:	Jury, Justice
	Tweet

From 'voir' = truth & dire = tell, voir dire has been evolving in American jurisprudence almost from its inception. Mr. Grant's statement here is being VERY kind. Amerika's courts today have very little to do with seeking the truth and less to do with law.  -- Mike, Norwalk
Justice System? What Justice System?....the whole thing is perverse.  -- J Carlton, Calgary
Mike and J summed it up very well.  -- jim k, Austin, Tx
One of the nuttiest things going on in our judicial system is this. If a prosecutor goes to a grand jury and the defendant is no billed, he is free to get another grand jury, as many as necessary, to get what he wants.  -- jim k, Austin, Tx
jim, how crazy is that ? I've mentioned multiple incidents that violated the double jeopardy clause (nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb) Concerning the grand jury, a friend that was not notified of the 2 grand juries that were held concerning him (he was acquitted of both) He ended up in court anyway without a grand jury ever hearing his case and on a statute that had expired. Getting back to Carlton's statement; Justice System? What Justice System?....the whole thing is perverse.  -- Mike, Norwalk
The American Bar Association (a private monopoly) is largely to blame for the 'justice system.' Like other multibillion dollar industries, they have to keep the bucks rolling in. It is positively criminal what it costs to defend yourself in court. You have to risk it all. You are offered plea bargains for admitting guilt to breaking 'colorable law' and if you won't take them, they will throw the book at you with punishments well exceeding any supposed damage caused by not obeying the dictates of the state. This is what happens when there are no checks upon the legal system that is defended by the legal system. There are no more common law courts, only commercial and admiralty courts which have been merged. The legal system today is a system of theft! The jury is the only check upon that, and jurors are at the mercy of the lawyers as well. A real reformation is needed in this republic -- a revolution will only destroy and pit one against the other -- return to fundamental principles and break these monopolies in the fields of law, medicine, communications, and banking which keep us all under their respective boots.  -- E Archer, NYC
Thomas Jefferson - "To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.” -- —Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:277  -- Mary - MI

Tweet  Rate this quote! How many stars? 0 1 2 3 4 5	What do YOU think?
Your name:	Your town:     CLICK JUST ONCE!

Get a Quote-A-Day! Free!
Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box.
Email: