I’m struggling to understand the role a grand jury played here and why they wrote a report. Maybe somebody with more legal experience can chime in and clear that up.

It’s my understanding that a grand jury is convened prior to indictment and consulted as a step to strengthen the prosecution of a case. The grand jury chooses to indict and can compel the testimony of those involved. This, however, sounds like it was past pre-trial phases. So what was the purpose of convening a grand jury at this point?

Then there’s the petit jury, which is the jury of 12 everyone thinks of when they hear the word “jury”, which is the group of people responsible for making a formal, unanimous decision at the end of a trial, assuming the defendant didn’t waive their right to a jury trial. It almost sounds like the article is talking about the petit jury, but makes a mistake and calls them a grand jury. Confusingly, I still don’t understand why a petit jury would be writing a report, either.

Since the jury is just made up of average people, who writes the report? How do they know what the format needs to be? The report sounds damning, but these people aren’t law enforcement or legal experts, so how much weight does their report carry? I think they’re right, mind you, especially given the judge’s admonishment of the police officer, but I’m just left with many more questions than answers.