The grand jury is a unique feature of Anglo-American law that has existed since the 12th century. Though grand juries have largely fallen out of favor, they are still used in many American jurisdictions. This is particularly true at the federal level because of Constitutional clauses regarding grand juries. This paper will examine the development of grand juries, the present use of such panels, and the strengths and weaknesses of the system.
Grand juries trace their lineage to 1166, when Henry II, the King of England, employed a body of locals as his investigative arm. The initial grand juries did not hear evidence per se, but rather were the sources of evidence, reporting what they had heard and seenùin other words, gossip (Frankel and Naftalis, pp. 6-7).
For more than five centuries, the grand jury remained an arm of the king. That began to change in 1681, after Charles II had restored the monarchy in England. Charles also attempted to restore Catholicism as the nation's religion, which brought a firestorm of protest from the Earl of Shaftesbury and Stephen Colledge. The King tried to use the grand jury as a public forum for his prosecution of the two men, but the grand jurors refused. They preferred to hear testimony in private, free from the pressures the King could exert in an open forum. This marked the first assertion of independence by a grand jury. After that, the panels often became the protector of the individual against the tyranny of the crown (Frankel and Naftalis, p. 9).
The English colonists brought the grand jury with them to America, though the panels often served a different function. For example, grand juries would report ôon the condition of public roads, the performance of public officials, and the expenditure of public funds.ö Grand juries in New York often served a legislative function, such as when a panel ordered dispensers of alcoholic beverages to also provide lodging for patrons (F...