Just thinking out loud with everyone... but... as we continue to work together our common goal, we may want to ask ourselves how do we structure this organization in such a way that best sets us up for success in achieving that goal? Since each state has it's own unique dynamics, issues and characteristics, the most efficient organizational structure in New York isn't necessarily the most efficient in California or any other state.
For instance... CA is one of the few states that already has an existing [seriously flawed] grand jury system already in place which is guaranteed by the state constitution. If CA's existing grand system wasn't so seriously flawed, perhaps one could argue that a common law grand jury would be unnecessary in this state. Conversely, one could also argue that the only reason a common law grand jury is even necessary to begin with it's exactly because CA's existing grand jury system is so seriously flawed. [by intentional design of state government?]
Under this system, CA law required by law that each year separate grand juries be empanel is each county throughout the state to investigate governmental mismanagement and/or corruption (often referred to as civil grand juries) These civil grand juries take public complaints, decide what issues they want to investigate, spend 9-12 months conducting their investigations and then issue a report at the end of the year summarizing their findings.
The fundamental issues with CA's existing grand jury system seems to be: 1) CA's justice system typically ignores their findings and neglects to prosecute any wrong doings of state officials regardless of how egregious their actions may be; 2) Under CA's state law, CA's existing grand juries report directly to the presiding judge who are notorious for falsely telling grand juries they're prohibited from investigating wrong doings of the state courts and has the authority to remove jurors who try to look into crimes committed by state judges. That all being said... perhaps we may want to consider deviating from the New York organizational paradigm (i.e. creating entire grand jury system from the ground up) and as an alternative, structure this using a model centered around some of these California specific dynamics. (i.e. a model that focuses/addresses the flaws of the existing CA grand jury system)
By that I mean... if we follow the New York paradigm by building an entire grand jury system from the ground up, do we run the risk of re-inventing the wheel by duplicating the efforts that CA's existing grand jury system already does well?
Alternatively... Would it make any sense to possibly consider structuring CA's model under the concept that CA's common law jury's role isn't necessarily to take complaints directly from the public... let the existing grand jury system do what they already do well... take complaints, investigate and issue a report on their findings... but instead we focus on reviewing the 58 grand jury reports already being issued by each county every year... and in instances where the state courts or district attorneys refuse/fail to perform their legal obligation to prosecute the crimes/individuals based on the existing grand jury reports, that's were our common law jury steps in, does it's own investigation based on the report(s) issued under the existing grand jury system... and if the common law grand jury deems appropriate, picks up the ball by filing its own true bill of indictment charges and if the courts/district attorney still failed to perform their legal duties, then a true bill of indictment charges are filed in federal court against the state courts/district attorney who failed to perform their duties.
If the state courts/district attorney know that they're going to be held accountable by CA's common law grand jury if they fail to perform their duties to insure justice is done, this threat alone is likely to have a profound effect on the quality of justice throughout the entire state without even having to do anything directly.
Given the sheer size and population of CA... it may be more practical and efficient on a number of levels to create an organizational structure that doesn't duplicate the efforts of the existing grand juries in each county but instead focuses its efforts on insuring justice is done is state law enforcement agencies fail to perform their legal duties.
Just some food for thought... thanks...
Cal G_Jurors Assoc. thoughts about how to proceed, first JURISDICTION
follow on to Rob's posting:-
the cgja.org web site at least suggests some sort of a club, but no doubt there are people within it we should probably know.
Under the PUBLIC tab on their home page is "History Of The Grand Jury" by Jameson Phd.
Neither Common Law, or the Magna Carta are mentioned even once in Jameson's history lesson!
The only mention of 1215:- Fourth Lateran Council (1215)
Our Common Law Jury must establish jurisdiction, until that is established we really don't have a leg to stand on as far as I can see.
According to Bill Thornton everything you want to do and say must be filed in writing with a court clerk, I suspect something along those lines needs to be done here.
We need to be able to meet, have sessions is probably the correct term, and the only place to do that, and project the correct image is in the court house.
According to 1215.org (Bill Thornton?) the foreman should apply to a court administrator, and if he refuses can be sued for dereliction of duty.
Folks, we need to cut our teeth on something, it could be this!
My feeling is we should proceed slowly with baby steps, we need to get a lot more people on board that at least can support us. Rome wasn't built in a day.
EDUCATION
Here is just about the biggest situation that we are facing. I have read recently of some of the things that we should be working on, they include writing to all forms of the media, meeting with officials that should know about some changes that are coming of which they have no knowledge. This should be to inform, NOT threaten.
Meeting with law enforcement, Federal and state law makers, and most importantly those who are running for office.
Lastly, I believe that the investigative ability of a Grand Jury is a very powerful entity.
After the Common Law Jury has established Jurisdiction we should be able to obtain complaints that have been filed, and the problems brought up that have not been attended to in a timely fashion, the juries job is to make sure that our employees understand they are under an obligation to get this thing, whatever it is fixed! It's their job, they work for us!
I'm one of the people who needs some serious education on this subject, please set me right if you feel any information is incorrect, or if I have mis-spoke.
I am very new to all this.
Thank you.