Doubts About the Legal System in the US

Grand juries should not be allowed to deliberate in cases involving police violence. They work mysteriously and appear to be susceptible to racism.

A white policeman kills an unarmed black man and does not even have to justify his actions before a court. What sounds like a story from the days of apartheid rule in South Africa also applies in the United States. First it happened in Ferguson, and now it is happening in New York. Once again, a grand jury has decided not to charge a man whose actions ended a person’s life as the result of police violence.

A big problem is that there is widespread structural racism among police forces in the U.S., and this racism continues to reduce African-Americans to second-class citizens. Equally problematic is the fact that in court cases such as these, the wrong body of people renders a verdict in court. In Ferguson and New York, the decision as to whether the police officer would be charged was made by a grand jury. This is the kind of proceeding where members of the jury conduct hearings that are closed to the public. How they reach a final decision is unclear. Any communication by the grand jury with the prosecution or defense, important for purposes of reaching its decision, is completely absent.

This process is very ambiguous and produces reasonable doubt about the legal system of the oldest parliamentary democracy in the world. Neighborhood disputes may be easily resolved by grand juries, but cases involving racially motivated violence by police officers may be resolved much better in an ordinary court of law.