Aug 4

final-jur-e headline

Defense Team Seeks Indictment Dismissal Based on Improper Jury Instruction

ABC News reports attorneys for Bryan Kohberger, a man charged with murdering four college students at the University of Idaho, are seeking a dismissal of the indictment because they believe the jury was improperly instructed regarding the standard of proof. They maintain the grand jury should have been instructed they should only return an indictment if the evidence supported a finding “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Kohberger had committed the crimes of which he was accused. Instead, Kohberger’s legal team claims that the grand jury was given the standard of proof required for a presentment, which the filing alleges is having a “reasonable ground for believing that a particular individual … has committed” a certain offense. Idaho Criminal Rule 6.5(a) instructs that “If the grand jury finds, after evidence has been presented to it, that an offense has been committed and that there is probable cause to believe that the accused committed it, the jury ought to find an indictment. Probable cause exists when the grand jury has before it evidence that would lead a reasonable person to believe an offense."

Presidential Candidate Criticizes Jury Following New Indictment of Trump

The Hill reports that following the announcement of new charges against former president Donald Trump for his involvement in the January 6 Capitol riots and for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, 2024 presidential candidate Gov. Ron DeSantis took a shot at D.C. jurors. In a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, the governor wrote “Washington, DC is a ‘swamp’ and it is unfair to have to stand trial before a jury that is reflective of the swamp mentality.” DeSantis added, “I do, though, believe we need to enact reforms so that Americans have the right to remove cases from Washington, DC to their home districts.” DeSantis’ comments come during a time of declining public trust in the courts and increased scrutiny of the judicial branch; the governor’s sentiment neglects the value of voir dire in removing prospective jurors who hold strong beliefs that would interfere with their ability to weigh evidence impartially during a trial.

Georgia Judge Rejects Former President Trump's Request to Quash Grand Jury Report

According to CBS News, earlier this week, Judge Robert McBurney of the Fulton County Superior Court denied former President Donald Trump’s request to quash a report issued by a grand jury investigating whether Mr. Trump had criminally interfered in the state of Georgia’s election processes during the 2020 election. Portions of the report were issued earlier this year, including the grand jury’s finding that “no widespread fraud took place in the Georgia 2020 presidential election that could result in overturning that election.” The former president’s attorneys’ have criticized the report as “confusing, flawed, and at times, blazenly unconstitutional.” In his ruling, Judge McBurney found that, because the former president has not been charged, he did not have standing to bring this challenge. Regarding the jury’s prior finding concerning the 2020 election results, he noted that under Georgia Annotated Code ยง 1512-80, the judge shall order the publication of presentments recommended by the grand jury to be published.

Connecticut Judge Praises Serving on Juries as Patriotic

In a piece for the Connecticut Mirror, Judge Douglas Lavine of the Connecticut Appellate Court lauds jury service as an opportunity for average Americans to exercise their commitment to our country’s civic life and identifies serving on a jury as being one of the highest patriotic duties a citizen can fulfill. He likens juries to “trenches of democracy” where a group of jurors who may have nothing more in common than their citizenry must weigh evidence, deliberate, and decide upon outcomes that affect the lives of their neighbors and their communities. Drawing from his personal experience as a judge, he also describes speaking with jurors after a trial has concluded to ask whether they had more confidence in the court system as a result of serving on a jury. Most, he said, state that they had greater trust in the courts, are proud that they served, and would like to serve again.