Free Consultations & We're Available 24/7
WE'RE A BOUTIQUE LAW FIRM.
TRUST 50 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.
WE SERVICE CLIENTS NATIONWIDE.
So your probably thinking grand juries are independent bodies that actively investigate crimes and pursue justice wherever it leads, or maybe your convinced these citizen panels have real power to direct investigations, or worse – you believe grand jurors can override prosecutors and investigate what they want. Maybe you think grand juries still function as the citizen watchdogs the founders intended. Maybe your hoping a conscientious grand jury will see through prosecutorial manipulation. Or maybe you believe “runaway grand juries” are common occurrences that keep prosecutors honest. Look, let me tell you something – your desperately clinging to a fairy tale about grand jury independence. But heres the DEPRESSING truth – while grand juries theoretically have power to investigate independently, modern prosecutors have completely captured and neutered them, with 99.9% of grand juries simply rubber-stamping whatever prosecutors want according to Department of Justice statistics showing total prosecutorial dominance!
Yes, technically grand juries CAN investigate on there own – the Supreme Court said so in 1906 in Hale v. Henkel, ruling that grand jurors can proceed on there own knowledge to investigate crimes. They supposedly have power to call there own witnesses, demand documents, pursue leads, and investigate government corruption. But this theoretical power is about as useful as having the right to breathe on Mars.
In reality, grand juries NEVER investigate independently anymore. The last time a federal grand jury truly went rogue and investigated something prosecutors didn’t want was decades ago. Modern grand juries are so controlled by prosecutors that the very idea of independent investigation seems absurd. The power exists on paper but not in practice.
Why don’t grand juries use there investigative powers? Because they don’t even KNOW they have them! Prosecutors never tell grand jurors about there theoretical independence. Instead, prosecutors train grand jurors to be passive recipients of whatever evidence prosecutors choose to present. Grand jurors think there job is just voting yes or no on prosecutor requests.
The system is deliberately designed to prevent independent investigation. Grand jurors meet when prosecutors schedule it. They review evidence prosecutors provide. They hear witnesses prosecutors call. They consider charges prosecutors draft. At no point does anyone tell them “hey, you can investigate stuff on your own.” The independence is hidden from the very people who supposedly have it.
A “runaway grand jury” is what prosecutors call it when grand jurors dare to think for themselves and investigate something prosecutors don’t want investigated. The term itself is propaganda – making independent investigation sound dangerous and wrong. Every grand jury the founders knew would be called “runaway” by today’s standards.
Historically, grand juries regularly investigated government corruption, challenged prosecutors, and pursued there own investigations. In 1872, New York grand jurors investigated Boss Tweed against prosecutors’ wishes. In 1902, a Minneapolis grand jury hired private detectives, investigated city corruption, indicted the mayor, and basically ran the city until new officials were elected. THAT’S what grand juries are supposed to do.
The term “runaway grand jury” didn’t even exist until the mid-20th century when prosecutors needed a way to demonize independent grand juries. By labeling them “runaway,” prosecutors made independence sound like malfunction rather than the intended design. Its linguistic manipulation to justify prosecutorial control.
Modern prosecutors are TERRIFIED of runaway grand juries. If grand jurors started investigating independently, they might uncover prosecutorial misconduct, government corruption, or systemic abuses. The entire criminal justice system depends on grand juries staying under prosecutor control. One truly independent grand jury could expose the whole corrupt system.
The practical barriers to independent investigation are overwhelming. First, grand juries have no staff, no offices, no investigators, no budget. There literally a group of citizens who meet in a courthouse room when prosecutors summon them. How can they investigate anything without resources?
Second, all investigative tools go through prosecutors. Want to subpoena a witness? Prosecutor drafts it. Want documents? Prosecutor requests them. Want to visit a crime scene? Prosecutor arranges it. Grand jurors can’t DO anything without prosecutor cooperation, and prosecutors won’t cooperate with independent investigations that might embarrass them.
Third, the information monopoly belongs to prosecutors. Grand jurors only know what prosecutors tell them. They don’t have access to police files, investigative reports, or evidence databases. They can’t even Google things related to cases. There operating in an information vacuum controlled entirely by prosecutors who don’t want independence.
Fourth, the legal framework prevents independence. Federal Rule 6(d) says only prosecutors, witnesses, and court reporters can be in the grand jury room. No investigators, no experts, no advisors who might help grand jurors investigate independently. The rules are designed to maintain prosecutorial control while preventing any outside influence that might encourage independence.
If grand juries could really investigate independently, would they agree with prosecutors 99.9% of the time? Federal statistics show grand juries vote against prosecutors in only 16 out of 25,943 cases – that’s not independence, that’s complete capture. Even North Korean elections have more dissent than American grand juries.
This near-perfect agreement rate proves grand juries aren’t investigating anything independently. There just approving whatever prosecutors present. Real independent investigation would produce disagreement, alternative theories, different conclusions. Instead, we get robotic approval of prosecutorial decisions.
The few times grand juries do vote against prosecutors, its usually because prosecutors deliberately “throw” cases they don’t want to prosecute but need political cover for dropping. Prosecutors present weak evidence on purpose, grand jury votes no-bill, prosecutor says “well, we tried but the grand jury said no.” Its theater, not independence.
Think about any other context where 99.9% agreement would be considered “independent.” Would you call a board of directors independent if they agreed with the CEO 99.9% of the time? Would you call a judge independent if they ruled for the government 99.9% of the time? The statistics expose the “independence” as complete fiction.
Prosecutors have perfected techniques to prevent grand jury independence. They start by selecting compliant grand jurors during voir dire, weeding out anyone who might ask too many questions. Then they train grand jurors to be passive, emphasizing there role is just evaluating prosecutor presentations, not investigating independently.
During proceedings, prosecutors control everything. They decide which cases to present when, preventing grand jurors from focusing too long on any one matter. They overwhelm grand jurors with volume – dozens of cases in rapid succession – leaving no time for independent thought. They present complex legal instructions that make grand jurors dependent on prosecutor guidance.
If grand jurors start asking uncomfortable questions, prosecutors have tactics. They’ll claim “that’s beyond the scope,” say “we’ll address that later” (but never do), or argue “that’s not relevant to probable cause.” They’ll schedule breaks to disrupt momentum. They’ll bring in different prosecutors to confuse things. Every technique designed to maintain control.
The ultimate weapon is secrecy. If grand jurors wanted to complain about prosecutor manipulation, who would they tell? Everything is secret. They can’t discuss it with anyone. They can’t go to the media. They can’t contact judges. There trapped in silence while prosecutors do whatever they want.
Before prosecutors captured them, grand juries were genuinely independent investigators. Colonial grand juries investigated government officials, refused to indict political protesters, and actively protected citizens from government overreach. They were citizen investigators, not prosecutor puppets.
The founders created grand juries specifically to be independent checks on government power. They were supposed to investigate corruption, challenge authority, protect citizens from malicious prosecution. The Fifth Amendment’s grand jury requirement was meant to create a citizen barrier between government and individuals.
Early American grand juries understood there power and used it. They investigated on there own initiative, hired investigators, pursued leads, challenged prosecutors, and even presentmented government officials for misconduct without prosecutor approval. They were active participants in justice, not passive observers.
The transformation from independent investigators to prosecutor tools happened gradually through the 20th century. As professional prosecutors emerged, they slowly took control. They convinced courts that “efficiency” required prosecutor management. They created rules limiting grand jury power. They redefined independence as dysfunction. By the 1960s, the capture was complete.
On the incredibly rare occasions when modern grand jurors try to investigate independently, prosecutors shut them down immediately. Grand jurors who ask too many questions get lectured about “staying within proper bounds.” Those who persist might get dismissed for “misconduct.” The message is clear: don’t rock the boat.
I’ve heard stories of grand jurors trying to investigate prosecutor misconduct or police corruption, only to be told “that’s not your job.” When they insist, prosecutors threaten them with contempt charges for violating secrecy rules. When they persist, there dismissed and replaced with more compliant grand jurors.
Even if an entire grand jury wanted to investigate independently, they’d face impossible barriers. No subpoena power without prosecutor cooperation. No access to witnesses without prosecutor arrangement. No ability to hire investigators or experts. No resources to pursue leads. The structural barriers are insurmountable.
The system punishes independence and rewards compliance. Grand jurors who rubber-stamp everything get thanked for there service. Those who ask questions get labeled troublemakers. The social pressure to conform is enormous. Who wants to be the difficult grand juror making everyone stay late with questions?
Call us RIGHT NOW at 212-300-5196
Grand juries WON’T investigate independently – you need real defense!
Available 24/7 because prosecutor-controlled grand juries offer no protection!
The bottom line is while grand juries theoretically CAN investigate independently, in practice they NEVER do – prosecutors have completely captured and controlled them! The 99.9% agreement rate proves there’s no real independence. “Runaway grand juries” that actually investigated are extinct. Modern grand juries lack resources, information, and tools for independent investigation. Prosecutors prevent independence through manipulation, control, and intimidation. The grand jury that was supposed to protect citizens from government is now the government’s tool against citizens. Call us IMMEDIATELY – don’t count on grand jury independence that doesn’t exist; you need aggressive defense attorneys who understand the prosecutor-controlled reality!
This is attorney advertising. Prior results dont guarantee similar outcomes. Grand jury independence is theoretical, not practical.
Very diligent, organized associates; got my case dismissed. Hard working attorneys who can put up with your anxiousness. I was accused of robbing a gemstone dealer. Definitely A law group that lays out all possible options and best alternative routes. Recommended for sure.
- ROBIN, GUN CHARGES ROBIN
NJ CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS