"The validity of the column of #hrs/panel-year is in doubt
because it is derived from two columns of grand juror services
statistics published by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, and one
of those original columns, reporting the number of panels serving, is in
doubt. The reader should understand that in most districts any one
federal grand jury panel serves only one day per week and has less than
six hours of session time per day on average.
"Most all federal grand jurors have never had a copy of the federal criminal codes and are
not given any individual copies of any other documents to use, even during
sessions, and all are not allowed to take ANY documents home to study."
- James Ballard, Plaintiff-Appellant and United States Grand Juror, USCAMass M74-8075, Boston, MA.,63 Kugler Road, Limerick, PA 19468
+ + + + + + +
"1996" U.S. Panel Grand Juror Services Statistics
(actually from 3/31/96 to 3/31/97)
By Jim Ballard
These statistics tell us the amount of quality control in
federal court processes responsible for insuring everyone's federal
rights. It means that if you were a federal criminal defendant in
Northern Texas, you got an average of only 18.4 minutes of total
quality control time, including testimony, prosecutor argument,
reading the proposed indictment, and deliberation time on what
you'd be held to answer, whether your trial court, trial judge or
jury would be asked what questions how. Pretty slim pickins' in
Northern Texas, and the best, in Alaska, was still under 4 hours.
And generally, unless you're a government approved federal felony
crime accused person, you get zero panel grand jury consideration,
nada!, zip!
Ask yourself if you expect you could get a competent,
circumspect, comprehensive theory of how a serious harm occurred,
and alternative theories, couch it all terms of carefully
considered legalist law, and thereby depose and state the questions
that needed to be answered to constructively solve that serious,
public safety problem, ... in 18.4 minutes or even 204 minutes?
Actually, most federal felony indictments are merely fill-in-the-
blanks forms, and most federal panel grand jurors never see a copy
of the criminal codes they vote to apply by indictment. 18.4
minutes? Texans get more and better service than that from their dry
cleaners.
Have your news organs and courts given you constructive
Constitutional order, or have they merely been one-sided,
gladiatorial, Roman Circus-type, rat-race meatpacking operations,
not intent on solving problems, but only intent on appointing
"public enemies", reducing them to rubble, and then "making that
rubble bounce" in B-52 bombadier style? Your criminal justice
system and its press basically proceeds on a scapegoating basis,
rules by instilling fear, by terrorizing you, the public, doesn't
it?
But you didn't mind because the press says the people it
scapegoats aren't like you, are of a different color, or of a
lowlier background, a lesser rank, or they did something more
desperate than you think you've done and the "Why?" doesn't seem to
matter all that much to you? Well, it used to actually be like that
- criminal justice administration was really small potatos
demographically, but now >=0.5% of the total population is behind
bars at this very moment, not to mention the many more on
probation, parole, or in mandatory treatment programs. The panel
grand jurors are the ones who were supposed to police that entire
system, be the policeman's policeman, keep the keepers
themselves.
Ask yourself who controls the input to, and thus the output of
Ballard - "1996" U.S. Grand Juror Services Statistics; Global
Cyberspace Edition Notes - page 2
your federal panel grand juries, who controls what complaints those
grand jurors get to see? But don't blame only the current federal
administration because it's been the same rosey road to ruin since
the federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were first codified in
1946. Phone any federal court clerk's office or magistrate's
chambers and you'll rapidly find out you're not allowed to swear-in
and file a federal criminal complaint, if they can possibly stop
you, without the sponsorship of the politically appointed U.S.
Attorney prosecutor, even though there's no restriction on the
class of criminal complainants under 18 USC Rule 3 (governing
federal criminal complaints), and even though it's a federal crime,
a violation of 18 USC 1512(c)(4) to impede anyone from seeking
federal criminal prosecution of anyone (which means access to panel
grand jury aid must be universal when felony matter is involved,
i.e. whenever the maximum penalty for the offense is imprisonment
for one year or more). So you'll rapidly learn there's a huge gap
between the law and the actual reality. It's all really quite sick.
Any way one slices it, the typical federal panel grand juror
is kept in the dark, fed only the trash the political police
prosecutors want him or her to hear about, and is a rubber stamp of
the prosecutors who notably decline to prosecute themselves and
their agents and those from whom they seek favor.
The whole federal criminal justice administration operation is
really quite small, only 56,936 felony defendants in the "1996"
period, mostly young ignorami. But in my one southeastern
Pennsylvania suburban county alone in 1996, there were >=6700
county criminal court cases. In federal administration of justice,
civil cases exceed the number of criminal cases by a little over 8-
fold, and it's a little over 4-fold in most state court systems.
Folks must bear in mind that federal juror services is a
really small operation, was only about $53 million/yr. in total
direct costs in 1989, and is probably about <$80 million/year in
current dollars out of a total U.S. Judicial Branch budget
exceeding $2.9 Billion which doesn't include the U.S. Dept. Justice
budget.
Federal trial jury duty usually lasts less than 3.5 days
total, even though the problem it's asked to solve is greater than
>=$100,000 or >=1 year imprisonment as penalty. So trial jury duty
is obviously a lot less serious than what it's supposed to be about
...because lawyers don't like, can't afford to have jurors take
their juror services job seriously.
Federal grand juror services costs are only a minority
fraction of total federal juror services costs, were only $11.4
million/year in direct costs in the 6/30/88-6/30/89 year, about
$55/grand juror/day in direct costs, probably less than a total of
$18 million that year when all support costs, including
Ballard - "1996" U.S. Grand Juror Services Statistics; Global
Cyberspace Edition Notes - page 3
stenography, attorney costs, and witness protection/witness bribe
costs are added in. The per panel grand juror costs are currently
likely to be about <=$70/day for the national average, so with one
session averaging 5.2 hours/day, 52,330 total session hours, and
19.8 panel grand jurors per average session, the total direct cost
of the federal panel grand jury system in the "1996" period, was
<=$14 million.
Ask yourself how likely is it that the federal judiciary, in
charge of spending >$2.9 billion/year, would pay serious attention
to mandatory, part-time, amateur help amounting to only $14
million/year? The idiotic judiciary think they're God in comparison
to mere grand jurors, and all 3 blind-mice Branches of government
and the entire bar are that way. They feel palpable fear if we
merely show we can walk and chew gum at the same time. To them,
we're what the Ghost of Christmas Past was to Ebeneezer Scrooge.
Here in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, total "1996"
U.S. panel grand jury direct costs were about $379K, and there were
only 598 federal felony cases with a total of 957 defendants. Total
criminal justice system public costs in the district, which covers
11 counties including Philadelphia PA, were between $700 and $950
million in the period. To drastically understate the case, it was
unlikely that a <$379,000 system of blindered, one-day-per-week
part-timers who only proceed in committees-of-the-whole of 18.6
persons on average, were able to adequately insure even mild
respect for the federal Bill of Rights rights even for the accuseds
in the >=$700 million system, let alone for all the some >4 million
residents in the district. Pretty obviously, the actual reality is
a basket case.
Column Headings:
A. Circuit, District
B. Strength: Average Total Minutes of Grand Jury
Session Time per Felony Defendant Indicted in "1996"
C. Percentage Change from 1994 to "1996" in the
all-important column B. strength figure
D. Experience: Avg. Session Hrs./Grand Jury Panel in the
District in "1996"
E. Total Session Hrs/Yr. for All Panels in the District
in "1996"
F. Meatpacking-Sweatshop Index: Number of "1996" Felony
Defendants per Average U.S. District Court Trial
Judge in the District
This table was compiled by convoluting 2 databases from the
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Washington DC 20544: (i)
"Table J-1 U.S. Grand Juror Services for the Calendar Year Ending
March 31, 1997;" and (ii) "1996 Federal Court Management
Statistics: U.S. District Courts - judicial workload profiles."
Ballard - "1996" U.S. Grand Juror Services Statistics; Global
Cyberspace Edition Notes - page 4
"<=###" in column D in some rows reflects the quarrel some
districts have with Column 1 of the Ct. Admin. Table J-1. Busy
districts tend to have at least 5 to 7 grand jury panels at all
times, meeting 1 day/week per panel about 50 weeks/year as needed,
but usually less than 20 days/year for one "session"/day lasting an
average of 5.2 hours. The typical federal panel grand juror only
works in sessions and only works less than 70 session hours per
year. A full industrial manyear (without overtime) is 2000 manhours
= 40 hours/week X 50 weeks. Having someone do an important job for
18-24 months at only about 70 hours/year is insultingly stupid so
some of the district court managers deny the numbers.
The "<=###" in column D says the number of session hours that
would have been worked 3/31/96 to 3/31/97 by the average panel
grand juror if Ct. Admin's Column 1 of Table J-1 reported the
number of jurors serving instead of the number of panels. Each
panel must have 16<=23 jurors, so districts reporting less than 16
in Table J-1 Column 1 had to have been reporting their number of
panels, and the "<=###" number in my Column D is the alternative
number for districts reporting more than 16 in Ct. Admin's Table J-
1 Column 1 where they could have been reporting the number of
jurors instead of the number of panels that served in the period.
Interesting graphs can be made from the below Table. (A) Grand
juror services strength can be histogrammed in descending order,
with the number of districts with greater strength on the vertical
axis. (B) A scatter plot can be made charting the meatpacking index
vs. grand juror services strength - it looks roughly like an
inverse hyperbola. And (C) percentage change can be histogrammed
from most negative to most positive. Send me a self-addressed
stamped envelope, and I'll send you a photocopy of those 3 graphs.
A more sophisticated table could be made including columns for
district population, district population density, district economic
weight, and number of nationally known manmade disasters and
"natural" disasters in the district. With those additional columns,
one could do scatter plots and run linear regression correlation
analysis between the strength/population columns and the disaster
columns. Court Administration, however, "Serves the Judiciary," and
the judiciary have no interest in such hard core quality control
analysis which would force the judiciary to be honest and to work
like competent social scientists instead of merely pillorying
unpopular peons furnished by the political police press.
None of this information should breed the slightest doubt that
the United States has the finest and most intelligent Judicial
Branch and bar...that money can and does buy.
-James M. Ballard, (non-panel) U.S. Grand Jury, USCAMA
M74-8075 et sequitur, quality control engineering, 63 Kugler Road,
Limerick PA 19468-1411; tel/fax: 610-287-8165; e-mail:
73042.1152@compuserve.com @ 9/13/97 @ 1330 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA.
"1996" U.S. Grand Juror Statistics (actually from 3/31/96 to 3/31/97)
In Order of Circuit and District
A. B. C. D. E. F.
Nat. Avg. 55.2 -16 41.3 52330 88
"DC, DC" 204.7 42.6 155.3 1863 36.4
"1st,, ME" 92.7 -28 66.8 267 57.6
"1st, MA" 157.2 -24 52<=858.5 1717 50.4
"1st, NH" 54.2 -37 19.5 195 72
"1st, PR" 36.1 19.1 89.2 446 106
"1st, RI" 129.8 18.5 38.6 270 41.6
"2nd, CT" 109.2 -24 33.2<=530 530 36.4
"2nd, NY-N" 69.3 -25 27.9<=558 558 96.6
"2nd, NY-E" 85.6 -3.3 59.9<=1198.5 2397 112
"2nd, NY-S" 113 -0.2 49<=1012.3 3037 57.6
"2nd, NY-W" 98.2 -5.7 58.4 642 98
"2nd, VT" 107.5 -42 32.3 258 72
"3rd, DE" 57.9 -49 18 108 28
"3rd, NJ" 70 -0.6 45.1 1083 54.6
"3rd, PA-E" 94.8 -14 68.7<=216.1 1513 41.6
"3rd, PA-M" 72.9 -21 34.5 483 66.3
"3rd, PA-W" 141.9 20 35.1<=738 738 31.2
"3rd, VI" 63.5 4.5 43.2 216 102
"4th, MD" 88.6 15.4 24.6<=443 886 60
"4th, NC-E" 50.6 77.5 27.7 277 136.8
"4th, NC-M" 28.4 101 45.5 182 96
"4th, NC-W" 26.6 46.2 28.8 260 195.8
"4th, SC" 27.7 -14 40.9 491 118
"4th, VA-E" 76.8 25.4 42.3<=698.5 1397 109.2
"4th, VA-W" 71.3 120 42.8 428 90
"4th, WV-N" 48.9 -31 21.4 171 70
"4th, WV-S" 133 24.7 41 533 48.1
"5th, LA-E" 53.8 -25 31.6 443 38
"5th, LA-M" 78.7 -33 25.4 127 48.4
"5th, LA-W" 43.2 -28 37.6 263 52.2
"5th, MS-N" 60.5 -24 24 168 55.5
"5th, MS-S" 69.8 51.7 62.8 314 45
"5th, TX-N" 18.4 -62 18.6<=371 371 100.8
"5th, TX-E" 36.7 -18 48.3 386 90.1
"5th, TX-S" 27.7 -25 34.7<=572 1144 137.7
"5th, TX-W" 20.4 -21 18.9<=377 754 221.2
"6th, KY-E" 33 1.5 18.4 239 96.6
"6th, KY-W" 43.8 -49 54.5 218 66.3
"6th, MI-E" 67.1 -24 40.3 1208 72
"6th, MI-W" 83.6 3.6 41.5 540 96.9
"6th, OH-N" 55.6 -24 28.4 681 61.2
"6th, OH-S" 70.3 -41 54 540 57.6
"6th, TN-E" 64.1 42.1 28.7 402 75.2
"6th, TN-M" 63.3 3.3 32.6 228 54
"6th, TN-W" 70.6 66.9 52 520 88.4
"7th, IL-N" 84.9 14.8 93.3 1120 36
"7th, IL-C" 70.1 10.9 46.9 328 70.2
"7th, IL-S" 34.7 -39 18.1 181 78.2
"7th, IN-N" 115.6 -37 49.4 445 46.2
"7th, IN-S" 59.2 -22 31.1 218 44.2
"7th, WI-E" 39.6 -47 32.5 228 86.4
"7th, WI-W" 50.96 10.3 26.3 79 46.5
"8th, AR-E" 57.3 -11 100.3 401 84
"8th, AR-W" 20 -37 26 52 52
"8th, IA-N" 72 -67 28.6 315 131.3
"8th, IA-S" 62.5 -20 33.1 265 84.8
"8th, MN" 95.1 42.4 36.5 621 56
"8th, MO-E" 62.4 -29 38.8 466 56
"8th, MO-W" 76.2 -3.5 40.9 695 91.2
"8th, NE" 49.9 -17 62.8 251 75.4
"8th, ND" 21.8 -49 22 88 120.9
"8th, SD" 37.1 -12 24.9 274 147.6
"9th, AK" 130 45.8 68.9 206 31.5
"9th, AZ" 30.9 -9.3 45.6 912 221.2
"9th, CA-N" 54 -31 51.7 879 69.7
"9th, CA-E" 46.8 -17 33.8 778 142.4
"9th, CA-C" 62.9 -19 38.3<=665 1995 70.5
"9th, CA-S" 27.8 -54 109.3 1312 353.6
"9th, HI" 61.7 -38 24 288 70
"9th, ID" 65 -45 54.3 163 75.2
"9th, MT" 24.7 -28 18.9 170 137.7
"9th, NV" 41.2 -55 65.8 461 168
"9th, OR" 39 -25 24.1 482 123.6
"9th, WA-E" 37.4 -12 25.7 232 93
"9th, WA-W" 66.8 -41 70.1 561 72
"9th, GUAM" 87 136 34.6 173 119.2
"9th, NMI" 123.1 203 16 80 39
"10th, CO" 43.8 -46 56.4 508 99.4
"10th, KS" 42.3 -30 24.8 273 64.5
"10th, NM" 20.2 -34 64 320 190.5
"10th, OK-N" 60.3 -9 49.6 248 70.5
"10th, OK-E" 46.6 -58 6.7 62 53.2
"10th, OK-W" 59.6 -9.1 34.6 277 46.5
"10th, UT" 38.1 -12 28.4 227 71.5
"10th, WY" 86.7 -27 52 208 48
"11th, AL-N" 48.8 -24 49 441 77.4
"11th, AL-M" 21.8 24.1 13.8 83 76
"11th, AL-S" 22.8 -19 14.8 177 155.4
"11th, FL-N" 56.2 16 43.8 350 93.5
"11th, FL-M" 56.3 -39 42<=693.5 1387 134.3
"11th, FL-S" 51.2 -44 47.2<=771 2313 169.2
"11th, GA-N" 55.9 -9.8 42.7 812 79.2
"11th, GA-M" 37.1 -23 30.3 182 73.6
"11th, GA-S" 73.4 -39 50.2 251 68.4
Column Headings: A. Circuit, District
B. Stength: Avg. Mins./Felony Defendant Indicted
C. %-tage change in strength from 1994 to 1996
D. Experience: Avg. Hrs./Panel-year
E. Total Hrs/Yr. for all Panels in the District
F. Meatpacking Propensity of District: # of Felony
Defendants per average U.S. District Trial
Judge per year
Ranked in Descending Order of Strength of Panel Grand Juror Services
A. B. C. D. E. F.
Nat. Avg. 55.2 -15.9 41.3 52330 88
"DC, DC" 204.7 42.6 155.3 1863 36.4
"1st, MA" 157.2 -23.6 52<=858.5 1717 50.4
"3rd, PA-W" 141.9 20 35.1<=738 738 31.2
"4th, WV-S" 133 24.7 41 533 48.1
"9th, AK" 130 45.8 68.9 206 31.5
"1st, RI" 129.8 18.5 38.6 270 41.6
"9th, NMI" 123.1 203.2 16 80 39
"7th, IN-N" 115.6 -36.6 49.4 445 46.2
"2nd, NY-S" 113 -0.2 49<=1012.3 3037 57.6
"2nd, CT" 109.2 -23.9 33.2<=530 530 36.4
"2nd, VT" 107.5 -42 32.3 258 72
"2nd, NY-W" 98.2 -5.7 58.4 642 98
"8th, MN" 95.1 42.4 36.5 621 56
"3rd, PA-E" 94.8 -14 68.7<=216.1 1513 41.6
"1st,, ME" 92.7 -28 66.8 267 57.6
"4th, MD" 88.6 15.4 24.6<=443 886 60
"9th, GUAM" 87 136 34.6 173 119.2
"10th, WY" 86.7 -26.5 52 208 48
"2nd, NY-E" 85.6 -3.3 59.9<=1198.5 2397 112
"7th, IL-N" 84.9 14.8 93.3 1120 36
"6th, MI-W" 83.6 3.6 41.5 540 96.9
"5th, LA-M" 78.7 -32.7 25.4 127 48.4
"4th, VA-E" 76.8 25.4 42.3<=698.5 1397 109.2
"8th, MO-W" 76.2 -3.5 40.9 695 91.2
"11th, GA-S" 73.4 -39.1 50.2 251 68.4
"3rd, PA-M" 72.9 -20.7 34.5 483 66.3
"8th, IA-N" 72 -66.7 28.6 315 131.3
"4th, VA-W" 71.3 119.5 42.8 428 90
"6th, TN-W" 70.6 66.9 52 520 88.4
"6th, OH-S" 70.3 -40.6 54 540 57.6
"7th, IL-C" 70.1 10.9 46.9 328 70.2
"3rd, NJ" 70 -0.6 45.1 1083 54.6
"5th, MS-S" 69.8 51.7 62.8 314 45
"2nd, NY-N" 69.3 -25.2 27.9<=558 558 96.6
"6th, MI-E" 67.1 -23.6 40.3 1208 72
"9th, WA-W" 66.8 -41.4 70.1 561 72
"9th, ID" 65 -44.7 54.3 163 75.2
"6th, TN-E" 64.1 42.1 28.7 402 75.2
"3rd, VI" 63.5 4.5 43.2 216 102
"6th, TN-M" 63.3 3.3 32.6 228 54
"9th, CA-C" 62.9 -19.3 38.3<=665 1995 70.5
"8th, IA-S" 62.5 -20 33.1 265 84.8
"8th, MO-E" 62.4 -28.9 38.8 466 56
"9th, HI" 61.7 -38.1 24 288 70
"5th, MS-N" 60.5 -23.8 24 168 55.5
"10th, OK-N" 60.3 -9 49.6 248 70.5
"10th, OK-W" 59.6 -9.1 34.6 277 46.5
"7th, IN-S" 59.2 -22.4 31.1 218 44.2
"3rd, DE" 57.9 -49 18 108 28
"8th, AR-E" 57.3 -10.8 100.3 401 84
"11th, FL-M" 56.3 -38.7 42<=693.5 1387 134.3
"11th, FL-N" 56.2 16 43.8 350 93.5
"11th, GA-N" 55.9 -9.8 42.7 812 79.2
"6th, OH-N" 55.6 -23.9 28.4 681 61.2
"1st, NH" 54.2 -37.2 19.5 195 72
"9th, CA-N" 54 -30.8 51.7 879 69.7
"5th, LA-E" 53.8 -25.2 31.6 443 38
"11th, FL-S" 51.2 -44.3 47.2<=771 2313 169.2
"7th, WI-W" 50.96 10.3 26.3 79 46.5
"4th, NC-E" 50.6 77.5 27.7 277 136.8
"8th, NE" 49.9 -16.8 62.8 251 75.4
"4th, WV-N" 48.9 -30.9 21.4 171 70
"11th, AL-N" 48.8 -23.9 49 441 77.4
"9th, CA-E" 46.8 -17 33.8 778 142.4
"10th, OK-E" 46.6 -58.3 6.7 62 53.2
"6th, KY-W" 43.8 -49.1 54.5 218 66.3
"10th, CO" 43.8 -45.9 56.4 508 99.4
"5th, LA-W" 43.2 -28.3 37.6 263 52.2
"10th, KS" 42.3 -30 24.8 273 64.5
"9th, NV" 41.2 -54.6 65.8 461 168
"7th, WI-E" 39.6 -46.8 32.5 228 86.4
"9th, OR" 39 -24.6 24.1 482 123.6
"10th, UT" 38.1 -11.6 28.4 227 71.5
"9th, WA-E" 37.4 -11.5 25.7 232 93
"8th, SD" 37.1 -12.4 24.9 274 147.6
"11th, GA-M" 37.1 -22.9 30.3 182 73.6
"5th, TX-E" 36.7 -17.7 48.3 386 90.1
"1st, PR" 36.1 19.1 89.2 446 106
"7th, IL-S" 34.7 -38.6 18.1 181 78.2
"6th, KY-E" 33 1.5 18.4 239 96.6
"9th, AZ" 30.9 -9.3 45.6 912 221.2
"4th, NC-M" 28.4 101.4 45.5 182 96
"9th, CA-S" 27.8 -54.1 109.3 1312 353.6
"4th, SC" 27.7 -14.4 40.9 491 118
"5th, TX-S" 27.7 -25 34.7<=572 1144 137.7
"4th, NC-W" 26.6 46.2 28.8 260 195.8
"9th, MT" 24.7 -28.2 18.9 170 137.7
"11th, AL-S" 22.8 -18.6 14.8 177 155.4
"8th, ND" 21.8 -49.3 22 88 120.9
"11th, AL-M" 21.8 24.1 13.8 83 76
"5th, TX-W" 20.4 -20.7 18.9<=377 754 221.2
"10th, NM" 20.2 -33.5 64 320 190.5
"8th, AR-W" 20 -36.9 26 52 52
"5th, TX-N" 18.4 -62 18.6<=371 371 100.8
A questionaire provided by James Ballard is posted below.
F6B4-285 10/8/78 James M. Ballard, U.S. Grand Jury
USCAMass. Misc. 74-8075
TEACHING QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PAID U.S. GRAND JURORS
Please read complete Questionnaire first and then
circle or write in correct answer or answers
1. Who controlled your grand jury's output?
a. U.S. Attorneys
b. Judge who administered oath of office
c. Grand jury foreman
d. Grand jury itself
e. Other____________________________________
2. Who controlled input to your grand jury?
a. U.S. Attorneys
b. Judge who administered oath of office
c. Grand jury foreman
d. Grand jury itself
e. Other_____________________________________
3. Was your grand jury special or regular panel?
a. Special
b. Regular
c. Don't know
4. How long did you serve on the Grand Jury?
a. less than 6 months
b. more than six months, less than one year
c. more than one year, less than eighteen months
d. eighteen months
e. more than eighteen months
5. What was the average term of service of your fellow grand
jurors?
a. less than 6 months
b. more than six months, less than one year
c. more than one year, less than eighteen months
d. eighteen months
e. more than eighteen months
f. don't know
6. What were you and your fellow grand jurors charged to
accomplish?
a. indict criminals
b. investigate complaints and indict on probable cause
c. investigate all complaints and indict on probable cause
d. research and report on public perils
e. other_____________________________________________________
f. don't know
7. Did your grand jury have internal committee or subcommittee
structure?
Appendix SCt. 248
F6B4-289 10/9/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 2.
a. yes
b. no
c. don't know
8. If you had committee structure, who created it?
a. U.S. Attorney
b. Foreman
c. hand-me-down from prior grand jury
d. don't know
e. other_________________________________________________
9. What standing committees did you have?
a. Steering - secretariat number of members:_____
b. Crimes against persons :_____
c. Crimes against property :_____
d. Environmental crimes :_____
e. Business crimes :_____
f. Civil rights and malicious prosecution :_____
g. Marshalling and Detention practice :_____
h. Sentencing and penal practice :_____
i. Law research :_____
j. State justice :_____
k. Governmental operations :_____
l. Pretrial, Trial, and Prosecutor
& Defender Review :_____
m. Media Relations, Trial Impact :_____
n. Expert Commissions :_____
o. Organized crime :_____
p. Police agency review :_____
q. other__________________________________ :_____
_______________________________________ :_____
_______________________________________ :_____
_______________________________________ :_____
10. If your grand jury lacked committee structure, do you think it
should have had committee structure and if so, what topical
committees?
a. should have had committees
b. didn't need committees
c. should have had following committees__________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
11. How often did your committees meet? (days/week)
12. How often did the full grand jury meet? (days/week)
13. How much time did you spend on grand jury work while you were
serving? (hours/week)
Appendix SCt. 249
F6B4-290 10/9/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors- page 3.
14. How was your time divided while you were at work on grand jury
business? (hours/week)
a. listening to testimony of sworn witnesses examined by
U.S. Attorney:______
b. waiting for U.S. Attorney presentation:_____
c. asking questions of sworn witnesses:______
d. reading transcripts, briefs, draft indictments,
court records, and complaints:______
e. writing or dictating reports:______
f. writing or dictating indictments or presentments:_____
g. other self-preparation for exam of witnesses:_____
h. discussion with other jurors (in session):______
i. discussion with other jurors (informal):________
j. discussion with prosecutors (in session):________
k. other (specify)_______________________________________
______________________________________________________
15. Who authored indictments?
a. U.S. Attorney_________%
b. other(describe)________________________________________
c. don't know
16. Do you know what a presentment is?
a. Yes(specify)___________________________________________
b. No
17. Did your grand jury ever commission research and report on a
topic of public interest or peril from experts by means other
than trial, e.g. a statistical study of recidivism rates or
geographic location of crimes or the structure of U.S.
national security activity vis intimidation of voters?
a. Yes, but only from Dept. of Justice personnel(describe
report)
_____________________________________________________________
b. Yes, including from non-governmental experts (e.g. a
University research group)(describe
report)_____________________________
_____________________________________________________________
c. No, didn't know grand juries could commission research
d. No, no question for research ever arose
e. No, our own reports were adequate
f. Other_____________________________________________________
18. If you commissioned research and report, how was it contracted?
_______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
19. How was it funded? ____________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 250
F6B4-291 10/9/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 4
20. Did your grand jury review FBI investigations in progress
without complaints guiding them?
a. Yes, all
b. Yes, only those the U.S. Attorney brought forward
c. No, only those upon complaint
d. Don't know
21. Did your grand jury review local police investigations in
progress but lacking specific complaint?
a. Yes, all
b. Yes, only those the U.S. Attorney brought forward
c. No, only those investigating a specific, filed complaint
in court
d. Yes, spot check
e. Don't know
22. Did you ever before hear of Ballard, U.S. v Ahern et al:
USCAMass. Misc. 74-8075 multidistrict panel court?
a. Yes, and I have a general idea what it's about
b. Yes, but I don't know what it's about
c. No
23. Did your grand jury ever issue presentments?
a. Yes________%
b. No
c. Don't know
24. Where did your grand jury get information to commence study of
each problem?
a. criminal complaints referred by U.S. judiciary_______%
b. referrals from the U.S. Attorney________%
c. reading civil complaints_______%
d. inadvertent referral, e.g. words of prisoner met
while touring prison________%
e. press
f. friends and relatives______%
g. business associates______%
h. other _______%(describe)_______________________________
25. What percentage of the complaints you worked on were from
non-officials?
a. _______%
b. none
c. don't know
26. Did your grand jury review every criminal complaint filed in
your U.S. District Court?
a. Yes
b. No, only all felony complaints
c. No, only complaints referred to us
Appendix SCt. 251
F6B4-292 10/9/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jury - page 5
d. Don't know
27. Did your grand jury ever advertize to obtain complaints?
a. Yes, on several topics or generally
b. Yes, on the topic of ____________________________________
c. No
28. Were any of your grand jury studies publicized before
indictment or presentment?
a. Yes, by grand juror spokespeople
b. Yes, but only by U.S. Attorney personnel
c. No
29. Did the grand jury ever hold press conferences?
a. Yes, frequently
b. Yes, infrequently
c. No, only the U.S. Attorney
d. No
30. Did secrecy aid your grand jury's work?
a. Yes, it was essential because_____________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
b. Yes, but it was essential only in the very few instances
where________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
c. No, it hampered our work
d. No, it was a device the U.S. Attorney used to control our
work and flatter and intimidate us
e. Other ___________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
30A. Secrecy of grand jurors is mandatory at 18 USC Rule 6(e)(2),
but government attorneys are exempted at 18 USC Rule 6(e)(3),
and government attorneys automatically get transcripts of all
grand jury sessions and grand jurors don't, although in some
state systems (Vermont, Montana and Nevada) the clerk of court
mandatorily provides copy of the transcript to the defendant
indicted or his attorney, mainly his attorney of course). Does
this tell you something?
a. Yes, we're muzzled and intimidated to irrelevance
b. Yes, despite any converse platitudes, the bar and Congress
wants us to be rubber stamps of the government attorneys.
c. Yes, it's so that our imprimatur on indictments can be used
by the government and courts to push people around and
hurt them, i.e. so they can use us to be nasty and make
civil war on our authority and we can't do anything about
it and aren't allowed to simply solve problems
Appendix SCt. 252
F6B4-293 10/9/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 6
constructively.
d. How can we beat that muzzling?
e. No, it's entirely normal and acceptable because our job is
to help the government beat up bad guys, and if we
weren't secret about it, the bad guys might hurt us or
escape.
f. No, it insures the freedom of our deliberations
g. No, it prevents witness tampering, lets the government
prepare its witnesses in secret to testify effectively
and say things the government wants them to say
h. No, if we talked it might injure the reputation of innocent
parties - only government attorneys should be allowed to
do that
i. No, as long as we can't talk, witnesses before us feel more
confident and freer to talk, at least government
informant witnesses, especially if the government pays
them off to tell us what the government wants us to hear.
j. Yes, the government attorneys are allowed to talk "in
performance of their duties," so it means grand jurors'
duties are too trivial to allow them to discuss those
duties. We've been had and subordinated.
k. We should be allowed to talk in performance of our duties,
and denfants and grand jurors should have copy of the
transcripts from the clerk once the defendant is in
court custody.
l. Other ___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________.
30B. Government attorneys insist they represent the government
and do NOT represent the grand jury. So if the grand
jurors aren't allowed to represent themselves, who
represents them?
a. Beats me
b. Renegade grand jurors
c. No one
d. Other_____________________________________________
________________________________________________.
30C. Were you aware that you can insist on Presentment instead
of indictment, and insist on civil rules instead of
criminal rules and thereby beat the criminal rule
muzzling of grand jurors, since law and equity are merged
in federal practice so the civil rules, which emphasize
openness, counterclaim, crossclaim, and added matter
claim and intervenor powers for everyone, are
superceding?
a. It's worth a try
b. The bench and bar would beat us up if we tried that
Appendix SCt. 253
F6B4-294 10/9/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 7
c. Who cares
d. Swim upstream? Blow the whistle? You gotta be kidding:
the bastards would eat us for breakfast or the bad
guys would blow us away. Let's face it, we're
dealing with people who hurt anyone who gets in
their way - the government and bad guys. I don't
want to risk being jailed, and I want to come out of
this in one piece. This isn't a church supper.
e. We don't need to talk. All we have to do is decide
whether to sign the indictment or not, and I
wouldn't want to have to explain the decision - I'm
a grand juror, not a masochist, and not a social
worker.
f. Look, what we do as grand jurors is only a necessary
formality, meaningless really. We can't afford to
take it seriously. Grand juries exist only because
the Constitution says they have to, but don't expect
much - jurors are only amateurs and temps. What
you're suggesting should be left to the pros, the
attorneys.
g. Tell us exactly how to do it.
h. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________.
30D. Of course the 18 USC Rule 6(e)(2) mandatory secrecy of grand
jurors is a false issue because everyone, including grand
jurors, has a right to testify whenever and as fully as
they please under the Witness Protection Act, and it's a
felony at 18 USC 1512 to impede them in any way.
a. Yes, we have a right to EFFECTIVELY testify, and that
means, since the pros are press dependent, we can
even publish books, letters to the editor, videos,
and appear on TV as long as we simply furnish a copy
to open court record.
b. Yes, and if we need a transcript of our grand jury
proceedings to effectively testify, we can make the
government attorneys fork it over, or we can nail
them with 18 USC 1512.
c. Yes, we can even walk into any courtroom and say we
want to testify, and that's it, they have to let us
testify.
d. Yes, so we're not really helplessly muzzled at all.
e. No, they want us to be quiet, so we'd better be quiet
or they'll find some way to hurt us.
f. No, I'm still chicken
g. No, only the pros, the attorneys, should talk because
they know more legal custom than we do, and society
Appendix SCt. 254
F6B4-295 10/9/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 8
really depends on custom, not on ideas and
thoughtful effort.
h. No, I don't want to have to talk about what I do.
i. No, if I talk, it could ruin everything. Better safe
than sorry: I'm going to keep still. I don't want to
rock the boat.
j. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
______________________________________________.
31. Was your grand jury ever subjected to challenge by voire dire?
a. Yes, frequently
b. Yes, on grounds we were incompetent at law
c. Yes, on grounds our array was wrongly drawn
d. No
e. Don't know what voir dire is
f. You gotta be kidding: voir dire of grand jurors is unheard
of. Nobody even bothers to make 18 USC Rule 6(b)(2)
motions against our competency as far as we know. There's
really very little feedback we know of from anybody but
the government attorneys. After all, if we're
incompetent, it's mainly their fault, so we can be pretty
sure that if we don't lie during clerk and judge
screening, the government attorneys will tell us
everything we need to know: if they don't, they'll
probably lose the case anyway.
g. We should have more feedback challenges to help us
improve the way we do the job. Since they can't prosecute
without us, our job is really pretty important, and doing
it well might make the difference between prosecutions
having a wholesome regulatory effect or merely pushing
around a few individuals but never really solving any
problem.
h. Other ___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________.
32. How many complaints did your grand jury review? _________
32A. How many indictments or presentments did your grand jury
issue?________
33. Did your grand jury make quarterly and end-of-term written
reports?
a. Yes, ______pages quarterly;_____pages end-of-term public
report
b. No, U.S. Attorney prepared and issued all reports or Clerk
Appendix SCt. 255
F6B4-296 10/10/78
Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 9
of Court did so
c. No, I don't know of any record being kept except
stenographic records
34. Did your grand jury do some law research of its own to discover
codes that might better apply than those the U.S. Attorney
proposed?
a. Yes, frequently and systematically by committee
b. Yes, infrequently we took potshots at it
c. No, we relied on the prosecutors
d. None of us had any lawbooks to do that
e. ______ (number) of grand jurors had a paperback copy of the
criminal codes and rules and sometimes raised such
questions
f. They should have lent each of us a copy of the rules and
codes, both civil and criminal, especially since they're
only about $37 per set. Had we had that, we might have
been able to do much better.
g. I have a copy of the rules and codes and want to know why
Presentment isn't mentioned even once, and how come only
the government can prosecute instead of us being allowed
to appoint prosecutors with the advice and consent of our
judge. It seems to me that grand jurors have been short
sheeted, as though we were Boy Scouts and the political
prosecutors are the Scoutmasters.
h. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________.
35. Did your grand jury have secretarial help for its own work?
a. Yes, _______manhours/week
b. Yes, but only for our reports
c. No, only the U.S. Attorney had staff
d. No
e. Only the stenographers who reported to the government
attys.
f. Other ___________________________________________________.
g. No, but I have a typewriter/personal computer at home.
h. No, but I have a personal computer with a modem and can
publish anything electronically. It's just that I'm
scared to because they don't want us to be at all open
about what we do as grand jurors.
36. In questioning witnesses and hearing testimony generally, who
asked the questions?
a. only the U.S. Attorney staff
b. U.S. Attorney staff _____%
c. grand jurors _____%
Appendix SCt. 256
F6B4-297 10/10/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Juries - page 10
d. others _________________________________ _____%
37. In questioning witnesses, did you know the background and name
of the witness and topic long enough ahead of time to prepare
your own questions?
a. Yes, _______%
b. No, _______%
c. No, and they never gave us individual copies of the
documentary evidence that we could take home and study.
The whole thing was rigged to stampede us and minimize
our effective, independent capability.
d. Other __________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________.
38. Did you ever, as a grand jury, negotiate with prospective
defendants to add or subtract charges and charge construction
in return for services at trial such as extra explicitness of
defense presentation and research?
a. Yes, sometimes we we added civil rights charges because
defendants could better relate to that, or subtracted them
because_________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
b. No, we didn't know we could do that
c. No, that's illegal
d. No, the prosecutors added or subtracted charges to help
them in off record plea bargain negotiations, but all
the charge negotiations like that were basically sub rosa
instead of being handled by on record counterclaim and
added matter claim procedure used under the civil rules,
and we never knew the results, never knew whether the
government sold us out. We were basically only a
government attorney bargaining chip.
e. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________.
39. Did your grand jury ever hold a secondarily culpable person as
the defendant and hold the primarily culpable person as only
a material witness because public trial of the facts and law
was more important than punishment and the primarily culpable
person wouldn't serve as a competent defendant, refused to
talk and research when faced with the prospect of conviction?
a. Yes, frequently
b. Yes, infrequently
c. No, punishment of the culpable is the object of justice
d. No, we didn't know we could do that
e. No, it seems sleazy, unfair, and probably illegal
Appendix SCt. 257
F6B4-298 10/10/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 11
f. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________.
40. Did your grand jury find grant of prosecutorial immunity
essential to your research?
a. Yes, without it many knowledgeable persons wouldn't testify
b. No, we could always find enough evidence to issue warrant
and withdraw prosecution so that witnesses had to testify
c. Yes, we didn't know that withdrawal of prosecution could
kill secrecy construction of the anti-selfincrimination
clause and enable us to constructively research and
report on problem instead of just push ignorant,
unskilled, "bad guy" peons around.
d. No, it was only essential to deals by the prosecutors
e. Other ___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________.
41. Did your grand jury or a committee of your grand jury visit the
jails in your district?
a. Yes, all jails (how often)_______________________
b. Yes, only those jails used for federal detention _________
__________________________________________________________
c. No
d. Don't know
e. What for? There's no reason for us to do that or work
outside the courthouse at all.
f. Other ____________________________________________________.
42. Did your grand jury review the projects and budget of the
following "law enforcement" agencies in your district
(indicate where there was GAO or other professional aid)?
a. U.S. F.B.I. _____
b. U.S. Attorney _____
c. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration _______
d. U.S. Secret Service ______
e. U.S. Bureau of Prisons _______
f. U.S. Marshal's Service _______
g. Clerk of Courts ________
h. U.S. Judicial Conference _______
i. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development _____
j. U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare ______
k. U.S. Postal Inspectors _______
l. U.S. Police (General Services Administration) ______
m. U.S. Dept. of Defense _______
n. U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms ______
o. U.S. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration______
p. U.S. Court Administration ______
q. state and local agencies (specify)
Appendix SCt. 258
F6B4-299 10/10/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 12
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
r. Only agencies where complaint of irregularity had been
made
43. Did you instruct prosecutors to make entire prosecution case
available by affidavits on the open record at the time warrant
issued?
a. Yes
b. No, we let prosecution withold evidence until trial
c. No, we didn't instruct prosecutors on what evidence to use
or how at all
d. No, we didn't know that failure to disclose imposes
unnecessary secrecy on the defense and means the
prosecution isn't telling the whole truth about probable
cause and has a chilling effect on U.S. Constitution IV,
V, I, and XIV Amendment rights.
e. No, we assumed trial is necessarily a sporting contest
between attorneys in which surprise is an important tool,
because the government idea is to convict and punish, not
do research, not find significant fact to solve any
problem larger than the immediate case.
f. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________.
44. Did indictments you issued contain or have a bill of
particulars and instructions for prosecutorial emphasis (such
as emphasizing the effect of the crime on civil rights) and
recommendation for the defense research and recommendations
for sentencing and sentencing procedure?
a. Yes ______%
b. Yes, particulars only _______%
c. Yes, particulars and prosecution instruction ______%
d. Yes, particulars, recommendations for defense and
prosecution, and sentencing recommendation ________%
e. No, our only duty was to to give permission for trial
or withold it
f. No, we didn't conceive of any purpose for trial but
determining guilt or innocence of the accused
g. No, other_________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
45. The proscutors tried to minimize grand juror participation?
a. Yes, they intimidated us
b. Yes, they overwhelmed us
c. No, they tried to encourage us but the milieu was not
10/10/78 Questionnaire to Paid U. S. Grand Jurors - page 13
conducive to learning and work on our part
d. Yes, they were cordial but never gave us materials or
means to do the work ourselves
e. No, we did the work ourselves as best we could
f. Yes, when they gave us documents, they only gave us one or
a very few copies to pass around as they talked about it,
not personal copies for each of us to take home and
study. They just wanted us to rubber stamp their plans.
g. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________.
46. The limitations on our resources seemed to be established by
a. by precedent
b. the prosecutors
c. the judiciary
d. the Clerk of courts
e. The Rules of court and statutes
f. other _____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
47. I was given a bibliography of books and articles about grand
juries and how they've worked when I first became sworn in as
a grand juror?
a. Yes, by the bench
b. Yes, by the Clerk of courts who also showed us a film
c. Yes, by the U.S. Marshals
d. Yes, by the U.S. Attorney's office
e. Yes, and other orientation in writing and oral lectures
by professors and lawyers and the judge who swore me in
f. No, but I looked up some books myself and read them
g. No, and I couldn't find any books
h. No, and I retrospectively feel I should have had a lot of
bibliography and briefings-lectures of differing points
of view to help me reflect on what I was doing and do it
better because I was a novice in legal matters
i. No, (other) ______________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
j. No, only the film and the little official Handbook for
Federal Grand Jurors.
h. No, but if the government doesn't tell us, it must not be
important or worthwhile.
48. Come to think of it, the prospect of punishment and the
severity of the process is so great, that we should have made
sure that defendants and especially detainees received
fullsome orientation on their rights and responsibilities too
rather than leaving that task to the arresting officers,
marshals, detention staffs, and uncertain defense attorneys
10/10/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 14
without checking?
a. Yes, we did try to make sure defendants got more
orientation than merely the Miranda advice of secrecy
b. Yes, retrospectively, we should have but we didn't
c. No, the defendants are adults accused of serious breach of
ethics and can jolly well shift for themselves,
especially since the system provides them attorneys if
they can't afford counsel
d. No, the Miranda warning is correct and sufficient (even if
it was only intended for officers acting without warrant
and never courts)
e.other_______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
48.A. "Trial should be proscriptive, punitive, vengeful in
prospect." "Trial should be rehabilitative, restorative,
prescriptive in prospect." Choose one.
b. Neither, because______________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
49. Were you ever imprisoned?
a. Yes, for over a year
b. Yes, for less than a year
c. Yes, for less than two months
d. No
e. Yes, unfairly
50. In grand jury sessions, did you have the following equipment?
a. a chair and table to work from (yes or no) ______
a hand calculator _______
b. pen and paper tablet _____ desk _____ typewriter _____
dictaphone _______
c. records of crime statistics on the offense charged ______
d. arrest and conviction records of the accuseds _______
e. transcripts of prior testimony in the case _____
topically indexed ______
f. computer aided, instant display stenography with
cross indexing ______
g. transcripts of the accused's prior trial and notes of
of custody if any _______
h. any index of hardship which participation might involve
for the accused or potential witnesses _______
51. In trials that you commissioned, was there pressure to obtain
conviction including by plea bargain, or pressure to obtain
trial?
a. indictment or presentment sought conviction, by all lawful
means, only
10/10/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 15
b. public trial was sought for its eductive, educative value,
and multiple misdemeanor convictions were the sole basis
we'd allow for those who sought to plead guilty
c. the question is silly because the purpose of indictment is
to lead to punishment of the guilty, and the more
expeditious means legally to that end, the better justice
is
d. other _____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
51A. What was the purpose of indictments and presentments you
wrote?
a. Let the government beat up bad guys.
b. Commission trial to determine guilt or innocence of the
accused.
c. Commission trial to solve public problems bigger than the
immediate case.
d. Simply state that probable cause existed.
e. We didn't think of it as commissioning trial for any
purpose, were only acting on probable cause, didn't think
about the larger picture.
f. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________.
52. In trials that your grand jury commissioned and which had
juries (petit juries), what equipment did those petit jurors
have?
a. pen and paper pad during trial
b. written questions they were charged to answer
c. transcript of the trial with deletion of portions to which
objection was sustained
d. topically cross-indexed transcript
e. capacity to ask questions of witnesses
f. capacity to nullify laws
g. capacity to regulate sentence
f. we encouraged trial jurors to make fully reasoned written
verdicts and exercise continuing care, not just issue
hit-and-run blank checks.
f. other _____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
f. don't know, we never checked
53. Did any petit jury ever refuse to hand down a verdict, in a
trial you'd commissioned, on grounds it was incompletely
presented and incompetent?
a. Yes
b. No
10/10/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 16
c. Don't know
54. In swearing witnesses did your grand jury use a religious or
secular oath?
a. Religious
b. Secular
c. Don't know
d. You want us to swear them in on the basis of found
knowledge and effort like an encyclopedia or the Handbook
of Physics and Chemistry instead of some sort of Bible?
e. Look, it's only a formality. We swear them to tell the
whole truth, but we don't mean it, just want them to
answer the questions we deem convenient. We don't expect
anyone to tell everything they know and can infer about
the matter by successive approximation. It's just not
that serious even if the accused is sentenced to jail for
years and years. Ours is only a hit-and-run operation and
we only want stooges because we're only stooges.
f. I'll be more careful
g. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________.
54A. There is a Supreme Being God that cares for everyone?
a. Maybe so, but non-locality in quantum mechanics also
means that everyone is god: the answer really does
lie "not in our stars but in ourselves" - since
transistors are real, Ghandhi had a point.
b. That's not the half of it: quantum mechanics also
means this universe isn't the only one like it down
to individual detail, not by a long shot, and death
is only a local illusion. The government and its
press have been running a state terrorism protection
racket.
c. Yes
d. Yes, we better watch out. There is eternal damnation
too if we screw up.
e. No, but it's a good idea for the kids.
f. No.
g. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________.
55. Who issued grand jury subpoenae of your grand jury?
a. U.S. Attorney personnel _______%
b. Grand jury itself ________%
c. Foreman on advice of U.S. Attorney ______%
d. other ____________________________________ ______%
10/10/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 17
e. don't know
56. Did your grand jury ever call a witness against the advice of
the U.S. Attorney personnel?
a. Yes _______%
b. Yes, very infrequently _______%
c. No
d. Other ____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
58. Did your grand jury interview every defendant just prior to
indictment after your grand jury felt it had enough evidence
already on record so that immunity could be granted to remarks
in the session, and let the prospective defendant see the
evidence against him before the session?
a. Yes, we interviewed each after showing evidence
b. No, we only interviewed ______% after showing evidence
c. No, we only interviewed ______% and didn't show evidence
d. other __________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
e. What for? You think we were commissioning those scum to do
someting useful by indicting them? The defendants were
only the dummy hand fall guys to us.
59. Did your grand jury ever review the work of the U.S. Board of
Probation and Parole?
a. Yes, we checked recidivism rates and substantiveness
of parole procedure
b. Yes, the U.S. Attorney had a report presented to us, but
I don't remember what it was about
c. No
d. Yes, we interviewed parolees too
60. Did your grand jury ever research the work of U.S. Pretrial
Services in informing defendants of their rights and
responsibilities?
a. Yes, we interviewed detainees on the matter
b. Yes, we asked for and got a report from U.S. Pretrial
Services
c. No, we never knew there was a U.S. Pretrial Services
d. No, there wasn't time
e. No, that was done by another grand jury panel with whom we
divided work
f. What for? The defendant is only the dummy hand scapegoat,
doesn't have to do anything but be there in court.
e. No, other _________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
60A. The justice we commissioned by indictment and presentment was
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 18
retributive public vengeance. We assumed that the defendant
would never be able to effectively retaliate against the state
by such as using TCDD dioxin to wipe out a whole city, albeit
non-lethally.
a. Good God! Don't give anyone any ideas how they could
retaliateagainst the state effectively! The public
enemy, public vengeance racket is all we've got: the rule
of law can only be based on fear of punishment by the
state, can't actually proceed on respect for merit. If
the state can't beat people up for us and even kill them,
we're all sunk. TCDD smoke at $115/lb. able to promptly
cause $40 million in evacuation and decontamination costs
would be as catastrophic as a cheap, easy to use weapon
whose only effects are (a) the user is immediately
caught, and (b) it instantly flattens every tire in a 10
mile radius. Stuff like that could make war impossible.
No wonder the Soviets gave up. It's not sporting. There's
got to some way for the government to silence you or buy
you off.
b. Yes.
c. Yes, we screwed up.
d. No, don't blame us for it. All we did was find probable
cause to set the wheels in motion.
e. No, blame the Congress for dictating minimum mandatory
sentences, making the rule of law mandatorily
retributive, instead of only saying the worst that could
be done under each code.
f. I guess we'd better think twice and try to run it all on a
respect for constructive merit basis instead since
victims of crime and victims of public vengeance or their
friends and relations could all wipe out whole
cities...even though they didn't tell us that in the
service, and although the press gave us no real clue as
usual. Please don't wipe out my city, my home.
g. Other ____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________.
h. The concept of the Social Contract finally comes dimly to
mind from civics courses years ago. I guess we'd better
write better social contracts and give fewer blank checks
to the bar.
61. Did your grand jury ever check the flow of warrants of arrest
to make sure that they did not obtain unless summons or lesser
coercion failed or would have failed?
a. Yes, we searched the records to make sure warrant issued
only on failure of summons
b. No, we didn't know there is a requirement to use the least
coercion necessary
c. You must be kidding. They almost never use summons
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 19
anymore, only sealed warrant surprise attack. The
arresting officer literally can't conduct reasonable
seizure, has to conduct unreasonable seizure prohibited
by the Fourth Amendment, can't even tell the arrestee
what he's being arrested for. The War on Crime and War on
Drugs are real, Pyrrhic civil war by the government and
its press even by the scientific definition that war
exists when related violent fatalities exceed 316 total,
not annually but total. The casualties exceed that
annually in every major city. It has nothing to do with
competent administration of justice. It's just civil war.
The U.S. Attorney and judiciary are war criminals. We've
been had.
c. Other_____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
62. In interviewing witnesses and conducting our research we
focussed on:
a. what happened & whodunnit
b. what happened & whatdunnit
c. what the harm actually was, whatdunnit, and what best to
do about it
d. we didn't have time or resources for method c.
e. we were largely passive, but the U.S. Attorney focussed on
whodunnit. Whaddya expect?: government is a protection
racket.
f. other_____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
63. The percentage of our session stenographically recorded was
______%
64. The percentage of our sessions transcripted was _______%
65. The percentage of our sessions transcripted to open record and
topically cross-indexed was _______%
66. Would you personally seek to flee from the justice your
indictments and presentments sought to propose?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Other______________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
67. How many complaints did your grand jury process during its
10/11/78 Questionnaire for Paid U. S. Grand Jurors - page 20
term? _______
68. How many indictments and/or presentments did your grand jury
issue?
a. __________
b. don't know
c. I don't have the faintest idea what my panel did
69. How many indictments or presentments of your panel were
dismissed? ______
a. don't know
70. How many acquittals? _________
a. don't know
71. How many trials by jury?
a. ________
b. don't know
72. Did your grand jury leave sentencing entirely to the trial
courts your grand jury commissioned or make the commission
contingent upon specific sentencing practice?
a. Yes, and the criteria of process we imposed were _____
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
in ______% of our indictments and presentments
b. didn't know we could bargain like that
c. No,____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
73. In what percentage of convictions were your defendants
sentenced to some actual service to the public, not merely
fine and imprisonment?
a. ________%
b. don't know
74. In what percentage of cases did you make sure that your
detainees had the tools necessary to direct their tables (e.g.
dockets, typewriters, specify)?
a. ______% tools assured:____________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
b. don't know
75. What precautions did your grand jury take to make sure its work
wasn't used to illegally incarcerate persons and violate their
their U.S. Constitutional Amendment rights? __________________
_________________________________________________________
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 21
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
b. we didn't take any precautions against illegal imprisonment
at all: all we did was indict on finding of probable
cause.
75A. Choose one: a. Government should make sense. b. Government
should make reason.
c. other ___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
76. What procedure did you use in such matters as police abuse of
rights to obtain the fullest possible data base, the largest
number of valid complaints of incidents where the problem may
have arisen, or did you seek a full database?_________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
b. we didn't do anything but consider the cases as the U.S.
Attorney's office chose to present them to us. So,
c. Since he presented only a very few, we thought we were only
dealing with matter of a very few rogue cops
d. We weren't presented with any police misconduct cases
e. We weren't presented with any cases where there might have
been a larger pattern of related offenses of which we
were not told.
f. We were sometimes presented with cases where there was
probably a larger pattern of offenses which we didn't
investigate nor send to trial as a single, complex
litigation unit, because we thought our job was only to
commission trial of each individual or a few individuals
at a time, not to use to courts to try to solve complex,
large problems involving lots of people.
76A. There should be class exclusivity to the power of arrest with
warrant; only Executive Branch agents and judges should have
the power of arrest with warrant but the citizen's arrest
power without warrant should remain intact? (Why or why not)
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 22
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
77. What procedure did you use to make sure ordinary citizens,
non-officials could file complaints to reach your grand jury's
attention without political screening by the politically
appointed U.S. Attorney, or did you take any such precaution
against the exclusivity of complainants?
a. We took no such precautions
b. We didn't realize that the U.S. Attorney is a political
appointee
c. We didn't realize that the U.S. Attorney politically
controlled access to our grand jury by politically
controlling complaint process by tradition and caselaw
without statutory authority to do so
d. Our purview didn't seem to be politically controlled
because usually the U.S. Attorney and his assistants
brought us valid concerns, although of course we were
unaware and had no way to know of things he politically
skipped over.
e. other:_____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
78. Were you paid by the Clerk of Court for your grand jury
service?
a. Yes, $_______/day of service including expenses
b. Yes, an average of $ ________/week while I served
c. No, refused to accept payment because______________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
d. No, payment wasn't given to me because ____________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
79. Were you paid by your ordinary employer during your term of
grand jury service?
a. Yes, but only for the hours I worked for my employer
b. Yes, at full salary while I served full time on the grand
jury
c. Yes, at full salary while I worked part-time and served
part-time
d. No (explain)___________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 23
80. What was the average (mean) income of grand jurors on your
panel while they served (guess)? $___________/year.
b. don't know
81. What was your income during your term of service?
$__________/yr.
82. What was the median (half of grand jurors above, half below)
income of grand jurors on your panel while you served?
$___________/yr.
b. don't know
83. What was their mean income normally? $__________/yr. Median?
$________/yr mean family income? $___________/yr. median
family income? $________/yr.
b. don't know
84. What was your family income for the two years preceding your
term of service? $_____________/yr.
85. Are you the breadwinner of your family?
a. Yes, all alone
b. Yes, but spouse also works
c. No, spouse earns most money
d. No, I don't usually earn money
e. Other__________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
88. Are you male or female? _____________
89. What is your age? ___________
90. What is your ordinary occupation?___________________________
______________________________________________________
91. Have you ever supervised people in your ordinary employment?
a. Yes, (number) ________ for _______years.
b. No
92. Did you serve in the Armed Forces?
a. Yes, at (highest rank) ___________________ for ______ years
at(assignment-skill)_____________________________________
b. No
c. Yes, served during wartime in combat
93. What level of formal education have you attained (prior to
grand jury service)? (if college or graduate school, please
cite major area of study) ___________________________________
________________________________________________________
94. Can you personally appraise:
a. double entry bookeeping? (yes or no) ______
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 24
b. business prospectus, annual reports? ______
c. medical analysis? _______
d. Gaussian statistics? ________
e. Pie graphs? ________
f. Variance analyses? _______
g. Actuarial statistics? ________
h. Census reports? _________
i. Constitutionality of laws? _________
j. Additions, subtractions, and percentages? _______
k. Constitutionality of worldviews? _________
l. adequacy of scholastic curricula? ________
m. complaints? ________
95. Have you ever been a party in any type of litigation before
your grand jury service?
a. Yes (type of suit and status)____________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
b. No
96. Have you ever represented yourself as a party in any litigation
prior to your grand jury service?
a. Yes
b. Yes, as co-counsel with my lawyer
c. No
d. No, but I did testify in a case where I was a party
97. Have you had any formal training or education at law (include
undergraduate courses on Constitutional law, law school,
business law courses, courses on military law in service,
etc.)? (describe)____________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
98. Have you ever served in the law enforcement field, or have
close relatives in that field (including lawyers in the
family)? (describe) _________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
99. Did you feel you were more or less qualified than most of your
fellow grand jurors?
a. More qualified
b. Less qualified
c. Average
d. Other comments ___________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 25
100. Do you feel you and your fellow grand jurors were adequately
qualified to serve as grand jurors?
a. Yes, no reservations
b. I was, others weren't
c. I wasn't, most others were
d. Yes, but we should have had additional orientation for
the job as question 47 suggests
e. No, only a very few were really qualified
f. No, the task should be left to lawyers exclusively
g. Other comments ____________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
h. No, because, as it turned out, we all really left the task
to the lawyers and police
101. What is your religion, if any or none?____________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
102. Are you an active member of a church (religiously, not
socially) or otherwise actively religious? (describe)
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 260 F6B4-303 10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 14
103. Have you heard of (1978) H.R. 94, Eilberg's "grand jury Reform
Bill?" (It didn't pass, and FBI convicted Eilberg by a sting)
a. Yes, I read the bill and support oppose it
b. Yes, I read published critiques of the bill and support
oppose it
c. Yes, I heard about it on the TV news and support oppose it
d. No
e. Yes, and I've discussed it with other grand jurors and
support oppose it
f. other__________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
104. Do you think immunity from prosecution should be
a. curbed by the means suggested in question 40
b. kept at "use" immunity
c. extended to "transactional" immunity
d. other____________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
105. Do you feel that there should be safeguards to make sure any
person can inform grand juries by complaint screened only for
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 26
specificity by the judiciary and not screened by U.S.
Attorneys or other non-judiciary officials?
a. Yes, screen only for specificity
b. No, grand jury system would be overwhelmed without
Executive Branch screening of complaints
c. No, grand jurors would be confused by a plethora of
complaints and might miss important matters without
Executive screening
d. Other__________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
106. Do you feel that grand juries should be more open (since their
work is always half-baked or we wouldn't need trial courts,
would we?) or that more guarantees of secrecy should be
imposed with stiff penalties?
a. Open it up more
b. Make it more secret
c. Leave it as is
d. Other____________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
107. Do you think that defendants or prospective accuseds should be
allowed to have their lawyer present when being examined by
grand juries? ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
108. Do you feel that since justice is Constitutionally to be an
open record, publically reviewable process, all grand jury
work should be transcripted to public record including most
discussion within six months or so, or that confidentiality
should be maintained and no more transcripts available than
currently, or even fewer transcripts and stricter secrecy in
that regard? ________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Apppendix SCt. 261 F6B4-306 Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand
Jurors - page 15
108A. Give grand jury transcripts to all defendants at arraignment?
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 27
a. Yes
b. No
c. Yes, unless court orders otherwise for witness safety
d. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
108B. Pretrial discovery should be between the defendant (attorney)
and the government attorney?
a. That's Rule 16, frequently honored in the breach to
protect informants and law enforcement
"investigation methods", government secrets
b. Make sure the defendants themselves get it, the hell
with the damn attorneys
c. Make sure it all gets copied to open court record.
d. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________.
108C. 28 USC Rule 24 of the civil rules, provides for intervenors,
allows people who have an interest in the case to sign up
as litigants in it. There's no provision for that in the
criminal rules, but anybody can try to file anything
anywhere as a friend of the court.
a. Open criminal cases up to everybody, let the public
intervene if they want to.
b. Leave criminal cases closed to intervention.
c. Knowledge and insight have no boundaries: open it up.
d. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________.
108D. U.S. Court Administration charges $0.50/page for photocopy of
all court records, but commercial photocopy is about
$0.05/page or less, and engineering publishes to
libraries on microfiche at about $0.009/page.
a. The bastards! Open it up! Drop the copy cost and get
the records to the libraries on microfiche.
b. Who cares? The courts never really find any
significant fact, and really only push around
ignorant, unskilled, mostly young peons with an
occasional celebrity thrown in for false appearance
of fairness. No need to make the details effectively
public.
c. The hell with it. Seize some of the computers of the
worse than worthless National Security Agency spies
and put all court records on the whole planet on
line where everyone with a p.c. and modem, every
school, library, and business can easily see them
and easily intervene in every case. No point in
letting the cops have a global computer network if
my clerk of court can't even see the dockets of
10/11/78 Questionnaire for Paid U. S. Grand Jurors - page 28
other districts on his system, but if I get a
docket, I can publish it globally on Internet
myself.
d. Someone's been asleep at the switch.
e. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
___________________________________________________.
109. What was the average cost of an indictment including any
post-conviction correctional costs but excluding fees paid by
the defense?
a. $__________
b. don't know
110. What was the annual cost of your grand jury's operations
(excluding indictments)?
a. $__________/yr.
b. don't know
111. How many other grand juries were empanelled and in your
district with yours during your term of service?
a. ____________
b. don't know
112. Was there division of labor between the several grand juries
simultaneously serving? (describe)__________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
113. What was the per detainee cost of detaining a defendant while
you were serving?
a. $____________/month
b. don't know
114. What was the per convict cost of imprisoning a convict while
you were serving?
a. $_________/yr federal prisoner
b. $_________/yr state prisoner
c. $_________/yr county prisoner
d. don't know
114.A. What provision, such as periodic reports and 18 USC Rule 5.1
hearings, did you make to assure that detention or
imprisonment was edifying rather than instructive in the
use of coercion? (describe)
a. We took no care on such matter
b. We attended some bail hearings
10/11/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 29
c. We wrote to the judge that empanelled us
d. We reviewed all 18 USC Rule 46(g) (supervision of
detention pending trial) reports by the government
with the U.S. Attorney's officers/with the
committing judge in all cases in which we granted
indictment or presentment and pretrial detention
obtained
e. Together with other simultaneously serving grand
juries with whom we divided the responsibility, we
reviewed periodically the notes of custody of all
the district's federal prisoners
f. We visited all jails and prisons and locked
psychiatric wards in the district to check on
conditions and reported to our empanelling judge
all substandard detention conditions
g. We consulted with the U.S. Marshal's Service and read
their contracts with detention facilities in the
district, and observed detention and imprisonment
conditions in the district firsthand and reported
contract non-compliance
h. Subcommittees of my grand jury periodically lived with
prisoners for ____ days in the district to assess
prison conditions and hear prisoner complaints
which the grand jury then considered and sometimes
reported to the judiciary
i. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
115. Did your grand jury report recommendations for future grand
juries to open record for future grand juries?
a. Yes
b. No, but we should have
c. No (other)_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
116. What recommendations, if any, do you offer to improve future
grand jurors' service?
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
11/27/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 30
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
116. All criminal defendants should be given jury trials?
a. Yes, that is the right of the entire People under
Article III
b. No, only 10%
c. No, only those that insist on jury trial. The
defendant has a right to jury trial under Amendment
VI and should be allowed to cede that right
d. That's not a grand jury concern. Our only concern as
grand jurors is whether there is probable cause to
indict.
e. Since grand juries are the only ones who can
commission federal felony trial, it is also our
responsibility to make sure that all federal felony
trials are constructive, solve real problems
efficiently, and are somehow enobling to all
concerned so that they advance the rule of law. The
grand and trial jurors are the life force of law in
the community. Without the jurors' continuing care
the law is merely an imposition on the community by
external professional elites, and will fail sooner
or later. So jury trial is essential in every case,
and the grand jury that commissions trial has a
responsibility to make sure that trial is
worthwhile.
f. I never thought of the question before as a grand jury
question but it is one
g. other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 262 F6B4-459 11/10/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 16
117. What magazines and newspapers, including any technical or
11/27/78 Questionnaire for Paid Grand Jurors - page 31
professional journals, do you regularly receive?
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
118. What magazines and newspapers including any technical or
professional journals do you regularly read?
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
119. Did your grand jury use the Uniform Crime Reports or
Victimization Reports to mete out indictments so that each
category of crime was indicted with roughly the relative
frequency that it occurred in your district?
a. Yes, we used the Uniform Crime Report to find problem areas
and indicted on a relative frequency basis
b. Yes, we used victimization studies to find problem areas
and indicted on a relative frequency basis
c. Yes, we used both to indict on a relative frequency basis
d. Yes, we used both or one but indicted primarily on crimes
that seemed exclusively federal, leaving other matters
to state prosecution
e. No, we used another measure of need (explain) _____________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
f. no our indictments and presentments were capricious
g. No, our indictments and presentments were capricious at the
whim of the prosecutors who presented cases and we don't
know whether they and the police used the Uniform Crime
Reports or victimization studies or newspaper interest or
what in deciding what to prosecute against
h. Other _____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
120. I served in the _____________ judicial district of
_______________ state from (date) _________- to
(date)_________
b. don't know
120A. I attended _____ number of sessions of my grand jury.
120B. To my knowledge no one on my grand jury did any grand work
outside sessions of the full grand jury.
a. Yes
b. No (describe) ______________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
11/27/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 32
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
121. The number of persons in my household during my period of
service was ________. (Number) _______ were minors. (Number)
_______ had attended college. (Number) _________ had finished
high school.
122. I would be considered a member of an ethnic minority.
a. Yes (specify minority) ___________
b. No (specify ethnicity) ___________
123. I was ethnically in a minority on my grand jury panel.
a. Yes
b. No
124. There was a minority point of view that I think I represented
on my grand jury panel?
a. No
b. Yes (specify point of view)_______________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 263 F6B4-450 11/10/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 17
125. There were differences in points of view of the grand jurors
on my panel.
a. Yes (specify major differences in viewpoint) _____________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
b. No, there was little exchange of points of view
c. No, there was little general discussion and thus little
exchange of points of view about what we should be
doing
d. Yes, there were one or two people, a very few on the grand
jury who took themselves very seriously and expressed
points of view while the rest of us were just overawed by
the situation and just voted proposed indictments up or
down, usually up.
11/27/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 33
e. other___________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
126. Was there something that you personally wanted to investigate
or research but that you were either deterred from raising or
that the rest of the grand jury by majority vote nixed
researching?
a. Yes, I wanted to research _________________________________
_________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
a.1 Yes, and I mentioned it to one of the prosecutors but he
basically ignored or nixed the project and I dropped it
b. Yes, but I never had a chance to raise the issue
c. Yes, but I was deterred by the general milieu from raising
the issue; it was all controlled by the prosecutors
d. Yes, but the other grand jurors voted it down informally
e. Yes, but the other grand jurors voted it down formally
f. No, there was nothing that came to mind
g. No, I just tried my best to listen to the cases that were
presented by the prosecutors
h. No, I had no idea what needed to be researched and really
didn't do my job, sought none, just listened to the
prosecutors, and so did everyone else
i. other ___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
127. I believe the police should be allowed a system of secret
informants.
a. Yes, unless informants are allowed to remain secret
there would be no economical way to protect them,
and the police and prosecutors need informants
b. Yes, informants need protection of secrecy because
justice must do public vengeance which will be
resisted by criminal action against informants if
they are known
c. No, justice is an accountability process and those who
enable others to be brought to account themselves
ought to be accountable; besides the Constitution
promises persons shall be confronted by the
witnesses against them, not merely by straw men
d. No, if informants are secret and accountable only
secretly, it means that the police and their system
11/27/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 34
do not exemplify accountability, are only a
protection racket
e. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
127A. My grand had secret informants.
a.Yes b. No
128. Every complaint made to the police of a crime should come
before a state or federal grand jury.
a. Yes, and all complaints whether made to the police or just
to a judicial officer should come before a grand jury
b. Yes, that's the only direct way we have to check on what
the police are doing
Appendix SCt. 264 F6B4-461 11/10/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 18
128 continued:
c. Yes, and although such as mine had no way of keeping track
of such a mass of data, we should have one because it's
the only way the grand jury can know and reflect the
People's real concerns
d. No, we'd be swamped
e. No, we should only get complaints that are "against" a
specific person, not all complaints of crimes until
police investigation has produced a specific accused
f. other ___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
129. The grand jury system didn't have adequate data systems now
that you mention it.
a. Yes, we were taken advantage of, being amateurs
b. Yes, but I don't think the prosecutors deprived us or that
the courts deprived us knowingly, but just that no-one
had asked the questions you've asked before proving that
our action was arbitrary, capricious, or partisan without
improved data systems
c. Yes, we didn't have any data systems at all
d. No, the grand jury job is to curtail prosecutorial excess,
and we can and did do that inchoately without data
systems to tell us what the score seemed to be in the
larger society
e. No, grand jury duty is essentially amateur and cannot
entail sophisticated decision making systems
11/12/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 35
f. Yes, but my fellow grand jurors were flattered by their
position and power, so I couldn't really argue
effectively for improvement
g. No, the constraint that decision be neither arbitrary, nor
capricious, nor partisan is impossible to meet and
inconsistent with a federal system; and the grand jury
job, to commission trial, is only seminal, is rightly
determined by (alone) whether probable cause is presented
h. Other (specify)___________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
130. U.S. Constitution Amendment V says that only grand juries may
commission trial in major criminal matter?
a. Yes, but actually prosecutors do it all and the grand jury
is just a rubber stamp
b. No, it only says that grand juries are a necessary part of
the process for federal felony prosecutions
c. Yes, but grand juries since English times have
fundamentally only a small checking role and are supposed
to be mostly rubber stamps
d. Yes, and that portion of the Fifth Amendment should be
amended and abolished because grand juries should be
superfluous
e. No, U.S. Constitution Amendment V only mentions the
indictment-presentment function of grand juries, does not
tell their full range of duties or perogatives which are
defined by laws under the Constitution and are only
nominal
f. Other ___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
g. I never thought about it before this questionnaire but
it's important
Appendix SCt. 265
130AA. The purpose of grand juries is to gently marshal into
constructive court resolution every problem, anywhere in
the whole wide world which would be a public harm under
the criminal codes if erred upon, basically a research
function?
a. Yes, grand jurors are ombudspersons for the rule of
law and formal equity, and are community marshals
b. No, our job is only to indict or not on proposed
finding of probable cause by the Executive Branch
political appointees
11/12/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 36
c. No, the purpose of law is to vindicate the innocent
and convict the guilty, not to solve all problems
even though we claim to be a nation under law as the
most beneficent system of rule we can yet imagine
d. No, that's too hard for us
e. Research, smeesearch, grand jurors have to be
concerned with real concrete harms to the public
which deserve censure
f. Yes, but we didn't know how to do that
g. I never expressively thought of it that way before
h. other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
130.A. When bail or sentencing is a hardship to the kith or kin of
the accused, is it illegal attainder?
a. Yes, insofar as the kith or kin are not accused
nor convicted
b. Yes, but there's no way grand jury action can prevent
such attainder
c. Yes, and grand juries should preclude such attainder
d. No, relatives and friends of the accused or convict
need be drawn into the process and suffer somewhat
for not having kept closer rein on the accused or
convict to prevent the crime from occurring
e. No, harm to kith and kin would and does occur only to
the extent that they are dependent on the accused or
convict, and for that dependency they should rightly
suffer
f. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
130.B. The Constitution promises "assistance of counsel" at trial.
Should the accused and the grand jury be permitted not
merely assistance but complete representation by counsel?
a. No, trial should be eductive and educative and current
practice of leaving representation to the attorneys
assures that it is neither
b. Yes, trial is too complex a process for lay
representation, would take too long with lay
representation
c. No, representation by counsel should be limited to
compel parties to really participate in the process
lest it be distant and essentially peremptory
d. No, representation should be limited to the parties
themselves because otherwise the trial is merely
11/12/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 37
contest between attorneys who have no real interest
in the matter and will gloss over major issues and
dwell on arcane technicalities superfluous to
the parties and the People; law is too important to
be left to lawyers
e. No, if attorneys are allowed complete representation
they will control the accused and the grand jury and
we would all be "assistants to counsel" instead of
being assisted by counsel
f. Yes, it would be unfair to make an indigent person
ignorant of the rules of evidence and procedure and
law represent himself however ably he was coached by
counsel
g. Other _____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
130.C. Coercion in the name of justice, except for hot pursuit
arrest, should always be only by individually accountable
personnel, parties to the court for which the coercion is
undertaken?
a. Yes, there should be an omnibus civil case above each
criminal and the agents and assigns of the criminal
court should be intervenor parties, individually
accountable to all in the omni-case to exemplify
accountability
b. No, such complexification of litigation is unworkable.
Agents and assigns such as police, marshals,
correctional officers, social workers and forensic
psychiatrists need not be individually
accountable as distinct from mildly accountable
within their agencies
c. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 266 F6B4-461B 11/27/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 18B
130.D. Please state your political party affiliation if any, and
indicate the degree of your personal political activity.
________________________________________________________
11/12/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 38
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
130E. Please indicate any civic clubs you belong to (including PTA,
Rotary etc.) and offices you have held there if any.
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
130F. Are you a member of a trade union (if so, describe).
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
130.G. Arresting officers should be required to brief the arrestee
on the rules of court and mutual and separate
responsibilities as well as the arrestee's Miranda rights
to remain silent and have a lawyer?
a. Yes, the arresting officer claims inherently to act
for the court
b. Yes, the arresting officer must shepherd the accused
into court process
c. Yes, the arresting officer is required to bring the
whole matter to court as best he can, not just the
warm body of the arrestee
d. No, the task of informing the arrestee of rights and
responsibilities beyond the Miranda warning, and the
task of informing him of procedure should be left to
an impartial agency such as U.S. Pretrial Services
e. No, the arresting officer should be viewed by practice
as strictly an adversary of the arrestee
f. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
130.H. A criminal complaint should be simple?
a. Yes, at all times
b. Yes, initially, but the complainant has the obligation
to further tell the whole truth he or she knows, so
there should be a secondary, fuller complaint or
affidavit appended to the complaint
c. No, the complaint is the key documentary guidance the
grand jury obtains, and while it might start out
simply, a second edition should contain the whole
truth and fullest guidance the complainant can give
11/13/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 39
d. Yes, unless the complaint is strictly simple,
litigation becomes too complex and perspicacious and
expensive
e. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 267
F6B4-462 11/11/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 19
131. The U.S. Constitution sets the individual human being supreme.
a. Yes
b. Yes, but it is anti-solipsistic
c. Yes, but that matter is meaningless to grand juries
d. Yes, but the Constitution is meaningless on how to do
it
e. No, the Constitution creates and seeks a balance
between the individual, groups, and local, state,
and federal tripartite government
f. No, the Constitution actually sets the state supreme
because it is only the machinery of the state, not
individuals, who can effectively interpret the
Constitution
e. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
131A. My household contains the following weapons:
a. A firearm(s)
b. A hundgun(s)
c. Telephone service
d. Radio and TV receivers
e. Radio broadcast equipment
f. A typewriter
g. A photocopy machine or nearby photocopy service
h. A fax machine
i. A personal computer
j. A personal computer with modem
k. Professional home security service
l. Strategic destructive weaponry: TCDD dioxin feedstock
chemicals
m. Strategic non-destructive weaponry: p.c. with Internet
11/13/78 Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 40
access
n. A hand calculator
131B. The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms means:
a. The Framers of the Constitution believed the pen is
mightier than the sword, and didn't want to get into
the sword proscription business, figured the pen
would eventually win out without too many problems.
b. The Framers of the Constitution didn't want to get
into the business of regulating the global
technology by public proscription because that would
make the rule of law repressive and it would fail.
c. One can only regulate manufacture, transfer,
possession and use, not ownership.
d. Only states can ban guns, not the feds.
e. It means government cannot have a monopoly on being
a horse's ass, and that the poor and oppressed will
be able to strike back in horse's ass fashion too.
f. It means, if you want to ban anti-personnel use of
guns, you disarm not the people, but the leadership,
governments, take away their firearms from nuclear
weapons down to handguns, and give cops non-lethal
weapons, business cards, and laptop computers with
modems and printers.
g. The Second Amendment doesn't really refer to anti-
personnel firearms anymore but to typewriters,
telephones, photocopy machines, computers, the
weapons sober adults and business really use and
invest in.
h. The Second Amendment is outdated and should be
repealed.
i. It means it's not all up to the pros, really comes
down to the amateur jurors.
j. Other _____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
________________________________________________.
132. The purpose of law, as Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. said in 1897,
is to predict the usage of the public force through the
instrumentality of the courts.
a. Yes, the law and the courts are the proper governance
of public vengeance
b. Yes, public vengeance will always exist or chaos, and
the courts' task is to arbitrate the usage of public
force
c. No, Holmes Jr. spoke in an outdated time, and the
purpose of the law and the courts is to everywhere
lessen coercion in human affairs
07/07/92 @ 17:38 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 41
d. No, the purpose of the judicial branch is to safeguard
against excesses of the legislative and executive
branches, especially in the use of force and
preparations for use of force
e. No, the chief purpose of the courts is to enforce
individual rights
f. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
133. "Roots in the community" is a proper criterion for bail, as
suggested by the bail reform act, 18 USC 3142.
a. Yes
b. Yes, and the other criteria for exercise of judicial
discretion on bail are sound
c. No, the bail reform act would penalize people for
merely being alone, merely for not being partisans
or not being affiliated with recognized groups
d. No, the only criterion for bail is what surety is
necessary to secure the services of all parties, not
only the accused and including witnesses, to prompt,
competent justice, and to prevent harm to the public
e. It should be d., of course, but bail only applies to
defendants.
f. I don't have the faintest idea what the criteria for
bail are nor how they are applied. It's probably
screwed up. We'd better check and give explicit
instructions in our work.
g. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
134. The Constitution and laws are complete and clear, predict
proper behavior for all circumstances at all times.
a. Yes, but one must know a great deal of law to know all
its conclusions
b. Yes, it is so clear and morally firmed by custom that
almost all are aware of their guilt when they break
the law or are at least aware they are on unfirm
ground and should have thought twice before acting
c. No, the Constitution is a set of general principles
above law, and grand jurors and others need
07/07/92 @ 18:24 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 42
constantly try to themselves interpret laws and
their Constitutionality
d. No, the Constitution and laws are mainly proscriptive,
not prescriptive, unless you really know how to read
between the lines.
e. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 268 F6B4-463 11/12/78
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 20
135. Grand juries should serve occasionally as the Judicial
equivalent of Presidential Commissions or other public
research bodies researching vast social problems but with an
eye to the criminal codes potential impact on those problems
such as what the civil rights codes have to say about them.
a. Yes, the grand jury is the only non-partisan voice of
the People at law as party
b. Yes, that's what special grand juries are for but they
are usually run by the Executive branch or Special
Prosecutors
c. No, the grand juries themselves have no capacity for
research or for hiring and managing researchers and
are not intellectually equipped for such a task.
d. No, grand jurors are not intellectually equipped for
such a task
e. Yes, for example on the issue of ___________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
f. No the only purpose of the grand jury is to determine
whether probable cause exists, as suggested by
government attorneys, to believe that specific acts
by specific persons constituted a criminal
offense
g. Yes, because there are often conflicts of laws such as
between 22 USC Chapter 39 (1968 Arms Export Control
Act as Amended), under which lethal arms are
routinely shipped into foreign hostilities, and 18
USC 962 (felony shipment of arms into foreign
hostilities) which there could be probable cause to
believe is harmfully violated by many government
arms exports, so merely finding probable cause is
only the least part of the grand jury job which is
to gently marshal public harms to which the criminal
law can effectively speak, into problem solving
lititgation
g. I'm beginning to get the impression it may really all
07/08/92 @ 8:36 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 43
come down to the grand and trial jurors: the
political departments and professionals are really
pretty lousy at foreign and military affairs and the
judiciary themselves don't have the political
standing to do squat about it. It has to get pretty
catastrophic before the political departments and
professionals can even intervene with coarse
temporizing. Jurors might be able to do better than
that if they're conscientious and exercise
continuing care. And as for the military, although
they were able to grow fat threatening to
thermonuclearly incinerate 10s of millions for 40
years, they'd be wiped out politically if they
threatened to give a single teenager a temporary
case of chloracne pimples and prospect of cancer 20
years down the pike from TCDD dioxin. And as for
economic embargo, it's worse than dioxin, promptly
slaughters slews of poor people we'd rather save,
and there's a 0.84 r squared between econometrics
and violent civil strife fatalties among
the poor, so economic embargo is probably a
violation of the 18 USC 1112 code against
involuntary manslaughter.
i. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
i. Never thought about it before this questionnaire, but
it's important
136. The dollar is a good and efficient arbiter and the best
measure of a person is whether they can comfortably
prosper and provide prosperous children.
a. Yes
b. Yes, but the public sector is so large it has made the
dollar meaningless as an arbiter
c. No, their are other values we seek to enhance in life
(explain)___________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
d. No, in a sense, the world owes everyone a living to a
degree
e. Other ________________________________________________
07/08/92 @ 9:23 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 44
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
137. More police are needed.
a. Yes, they efficiently curb crime, and there is too
much crime
b. No, the per capita crime follows the demographic
pattern and the police and courts have little effect
on the crime rate
c. Never thought about it before
d. No, police do not efficiently curb crime because they
are too arbitrary; to further curb crime we need
better, more educative courts and more
conscientious, continuing care juror service in
close contact with the community
e. No, crime is largely by recidivists, and what is
needed to curb crime is better prisons and longer
prison terms
f. both more police and more prisons and longer prison
terms are needed
g. No, there is so strong a link between crime and
poverty and crime and youth that what is really need
to curb the crime rate is an economy prosperous for
everyone and stronger more moral family ties and better schools
h. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
137.A. Unreasonable seizure of person or property in either manner
or effect is absolutely prohibited by the Fourth
Amendment and is the essence of both crime and war.
a. Yes
b. Yes, and the struggle against unreasonable seizure by
man or Nature has been the driving force of all
civilization and even of evolution. And even if
death is only a local illusion, it's still an
unreasonable seizure to the survivors, so we're not
through yet.
c. Yes, so every indictment and presentment should
contain a rights charge based on that.
d. No, the essence of crime is _________________________
07/10/92 @ 11:17 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 45
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 269 F6B4-463A 11/15/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 21
137.B. There should be some feedback, some review of grand jury
work other than trial. My grand jury needs some public
report and review process periodically.
a. Yes, and the procedure should be:___________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
b. No, the grand jury doesn't need to be reviewed by
other than voir dire and trials
c. No, the grand jury is Sovereign, can only report by
performing its function of public
indictment-presentment
d. Yes, we have no one to discuss our job with
e. There should be a countrywide Grand Jurors convention,
and regional conclaves once a year/quarterly
f. At the very least, grand jurors should be able to meet
and discuss their experience with other grand jury
jurors in the same district periodically
g. The clerks of courts or U.S. Attorneys' offices should
provide a little computer network on which grand
jurors of different districts and states could
communicate with each other
f. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
137.C. Transmogrification, changing physical form, is too difficult
for people.
a. Yes
b. Should be
c. Grand juries cannot seek new freedoms, nor tamper with
God's Nature
d. It may be difficult today but 50 years from now
recombinant DNA technology might allow people to
change sex every two weeks if they wish or grow
designer fur in the winter
e. That's too far in the future but grand juries might
05/13/94 @ 4:15 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 46
have a role to play in regulating weapons research
so that it doesn't delay funding for such things as
synthetic simultaneous translation for all telephone
service to make it easier to talk talk instead of
war war. I remember the cartoon of a U.S. fighter-
bomber pilot over Iraq, saying, "O.K. Saddam! Now
we're going to finish you off!" and dropping not a
bomb but an AT&T Long Lines truck.
f. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
137.D. Jails neither punish enough nor rehabilitate enough.
a. Yes
b. They should punish and the rehabilitation effort
should be separate, elsewhere, such as at half-way
houses
c. Imposed discipline is punishment; self-discipline is
rehabilitation
d. No, they punish adequately
e. No, they rehabilitate adequately
f. Prison is basically superfluous, mere displacement of
problems rather than their resolution: most
perpetrators are young, unskilled, inexperienced,
and ignorant, and imprisonment damn sure doesn't
remedy that condition.
g. It's mostly the poor who get jailed, mainly racial
minority poor.
g. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
137.E. Astrology is a fraud.
a. Yes
b. Yes, but it is protected as a religious belief
c. No, it has meaning
d. Yes, but it is protected free speech
e. Maybe, but it harms no one
d. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
05/13/94 @ 4:16 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 47
137.F. The grand jury job is to cull out bad lifestyles, or bad
human organisms.
a. Yes
b. Yes, bad patterns of acts and belief structures
c. No, individual life is sacred. All we do is cull out
and proscribe specific bad acts
d. Yes, the fact is that we put people's lives on trial
e. No, we only commission trial of alledged harmful
facts, their cause, and their prospects, never any
person per se
f. No, the culling out of bad lifestyles is left to the
psychiatric police who proceed by civil rules and
non-jury hearing process, not trial. And correctly
so.
g. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
138. Without grand juries, the Executive Branch and its cronies
would be able to obstruct any civil suit, including civil
rights suits to obtain better grand jury action, if they
wanted and if they could get away with it politically.
a. Yes
b. Yes, but that hadn't occurred to me before and I don't
offhand know what grand juries could do to stop it
c. No, there are other checks and balances such as the
judiciary
d. That may be true in theory, but actually, for all I
and fellow grand jurors knew, the Executive Branch
U.S. Attorneys were periodically engaged in partisan
or malicious or obstructive prosecutions with our
unknowing approval, and without judiciary objection
or press objection, there'd be no way to know if it
was standard operating procedure because frankly, my
grand jury was mostly just a rubber stamp for
the prosecutors
e. Other ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
05/13/94 @ 4:17 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 48
139. Please rank on a scale of 0-100 (negative numbers would mean
beneficence) the following possible perils to U.S.
Constitutional order, and then rank similarly what grand
jury concern SHOULD be about them.
Peril rank Peril Grand Jury Interest
__________ ILLEGAL AND LEGAL DRUGS _____
__________ RACISM _____
__________ EXCESSIVE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY _____
__________ WANING OF THE FAMILY _____
__________ CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT _____
__________ other:___________________________________ ________
__________ WELFARE CHEATING _____
__________ WELFARE STATISM _____
__________ VIOLENT CRIME _____
__________ CRIME WITH WEAPONS _____
__________ TERRORISM _____
__________ MILITARISM AND POLICE STATISM _____
__________ INFLATION _____
__________ WAR AND CIVIL WAR _____
__________ ORGANIZED CRIME _____
__________ other: __________________________________ ________
__________ ORDINARY CRIME AGAINST PERSONS _____
__________ ORDINARY CRIME AGAINST PROPERTY _____
__________ CIVIL RIGHTS CRIMES _____
__________ PSYCHIATRY IN LIEU OF JUSTICE BY LAW _____
__________ ENERGY SHORTAGE _____
___________ other: _________________________________ ________
__________ POLITICIZATION OF THE COURTS _____
__________ NUCLEAR WASTES _____
__________ POLLUTION AND WASTES GENERALLY _____
__________ DECREASING LITERACY _____
__________ TELEVISION ENTERTAINMENT QUALITY _____
__________ other: __________________________________ ________
__________ SENSATIONALIST MEDIA _____
__________ ANTI-TRUST VIOLATIONS _____
__________ COMPULSORY UNIONISM _____
__________ DISEASE AND INADEQUATE HEALTH SERVICES _____
__________ FAMINE _____
__________ MILITARY AID TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES _____
__________ other: __________________________________ ________
__________ other: __________________________________ ________
140. Did you know it's a crime, violation of 18 USC 962 to ship
arms into a foreign war?
a. Yes, but I didn't know the code number
b. Yes, and I think it should apply to the Executive
Branch agents also because they are shipping too
many arms winding up into wars
c. No, never knew that, but it sounds dangerous,
seditious
d. No, never knew that, but it sounds like a good idea
05/13/94 @ 4:18 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 49
especially if it applies to everyone including the
government
e. If that means the government has to have some sort of
Congressional Declaration of War to just ship arms
into foreign hostilities, it's a dangerous law
f. Even if it is supposed to apply to the Executive
Branch too, no Executive Branch U.S. Attorney is
going to tell to tell my grand jury that his
administration is committing such a crime
e. Other: _______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
Appendix SCt. 271 F6B4-465 11/13/78 Questionnaire for Paid U.S.
Grand Jurors - page 23
141. The real name of the United States is World Auxiliary Student
Anarchist League of Establishmentarians, in effect.
a. Yes, that's mostly correct
b. I don't know what you mean
c. That's a different language, one grand jurors never
(should) use
d. No, United States says it all to the extent
individuals are states
e. Other: _______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
142. "Atom bomb. I've suffered." "I've sufferred. Atom bomb."
Choose one.
b. shouldn't
c. there are better defenses than the threat of mayhem
d. neither because: _____________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
142.A. A psychiatric "literacy test" should be administered to all
before granting their U.S. Constitutional rights to bail
and trial.
a. Yes
b. No, that's not secular
c. Not to all, only 8 percent
05/13/94 @ 4:19 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 50
d. I didn't know that was done to some people
e. Since psych defendants are required to have a rational
view of the case, it damn sure ought to be mandatory
and explicit from the government and bar, although
it's not.
f. Other: _______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
143. This questionnaire was helpful to me.
a. Yes, very
b. Yes, it was as though I'd been in a bad dream
c. Yes
d. No, it was tough
e. No, it just shows us what we can't have
f. No, most of the questions are irrelevant to the actual
work of federal grand jurors
g. Other: _____________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
143.A. Grand juries and U.S. courts should have jurisdiction over
private citizen criminal complaints even if the Executive
Branch deems them political matter, e.g. complaints
concerning prospective criminal violations by national
war policies.
a. Yes
b. No
c. Yes, otherwise aggrieved muslims with no means of
legal redress might bomb us back and take hostages,
Q.E.D.
d. Other: ______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
144. I want immediate demand for a better equipped, more accessible
grand jury system.
a. Yes
b. No, it has to be spontaneous or slowly through the bar
c. No, slow legislative reform is best
d. No, you can't stop political interference with
political action
e. Other: ___________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
05/13/94 @ 4:19 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 51
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
145. Indictments and Presentments should be broad simple. (choose
one)
b. Other: ____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
146. There is a famous 1939 trusteeship case opinion from New York
State which claims "An act which harms no one, including the
public, to a perceptiple degree, is not a violation of law
even if it offends a statutory norm." - Clark v. Dodge (NY
1939) 216 Atlantic 2d. Do you agree that there can be no
such thing as a "victimless crime," that unless someone
somewhere is harmed by an act a grand gury has no business
indicting or presenting the perpetrator of that act regardless
of its relation to statute, that the complainant and
prosecution must always prove that some perceptible harms
occurred to someone somewhere or there is no probable cause to
believe a violation of criminal law has occured?
a. Yes
b. Yes, retrospectively, but my grand jury has not yet
applied that standard. Sometimes we indicted on the
basis on statute alone without really knowing whom,
if anyone, had actually been harmed.
c. No, offending a statute, even an old, dim one is still
a significant harm to public morality
d. Yes, and illegal drug possession for use or even sale
harms no one without their knowing consent, and
should be decriminalized and put on a prescription
and counseling basis to take the money out of the
"illegal" drug trade, just as we found we had to
repeal the Prohibition Amendment on alcohol.
e. Yes, one can't legislate morality, and if custom
accepts certain types of private harm or private
self-harm, even in a statistically significant
subculture, it's counterproductive to use criminal
law to try to wipe it out - e.g. cigarette smoking
or drugs - "Leges sine moribus vanae sunt" (Law
without custom is in vain) as the University of
Pennsylvania motto puts it - but
legislation and criminalization can and should be
used against harmful public behaviors such as drunk
driving
f. No, sometimes it is necessary to legislate morality
such as anti-abortion legislation to protect rights
of the unborn who can't argue the case for
05/13/94 @ 4:32 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors - page 52
themselves nor vote. Of course, unwanted pregnancy
is a pretty unreasonable seizure of a woman too - 9
months going on 60 years - , and there are 35,000
born kids under 5 dying every day from famine and
easily preventable disease resulting from corrupt,
plutocratic strife. Maybe we better take better
care of those already born first. It's a triable
dilemma the Ninth Amendment Privacy Right the
pompous, pontificating Supreme Court used didn't
even touch. I'd like to see the see the
abortion/right to life question tried under the
Fourth Amendment by people with brains, but of
course, that might exclude the bar.
g. Yes, there is probably a lot of unrepealed old bad law
still on the books, and there would be no point in
prosecuting the federal government on the old 18 USC
962 (felony arms shipment) code cited earlier unless
you can convince a grand jury that more modern
practice under 22 USC Chapter 39 (the 1968 Arms
Export Control Act as Amended) has caused concrete,
avoidable, unnecessary harm which the prosecution
under 18 USC 962 could correct in the specific and
general case.
h. No, the whole discussion of this question is beyond
the scope of grand juror service, which can only be
to decide whether a statutorily culpable offense has
been probably committed by someone. The
considerations this question has discussed are
matter for trial juries, not grand juries. Grand
juries serve only an accusatory function, are not
general quality control devices, and rightly so,
even though trial is impossible without them.
i. Other: ______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
147. Federal grand juror service was a distinct financial
inconvenience for me?
a. Yes, a serious one
b. Yes, but only a mild one
c. Yes, a significant one, but I would do it again
because it's an important civic duty
d. No, it was not a serious financial burden
e. No, I only had to serve ______ days in _____ weeks
05/13/94 @ 4:33 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 53
f. No, I was adequately reimbursed, but fuller service
would have been a financial burden
g. No, I could have served 6 months full time without
financial loss but had to serve only _____% of that
148. Aside from financial considerations, federal grand juror
service was still a distinct personal inconvenience for me.
a. Yes, it was a serious personal inconvenience but I
would do it again because it was an important civic
duty
b. Yes, it was a serious personal inconvenience and I
would seek to be excused if asked to do it again as
long as grand jurors are merely rubber stamps for
U.S. Attorneys because that's not a necessary nor
useful service.
c. Yes, but not a serious personal inconvenience except
psychologically
d. Yes, I would not do it again unless better
prepared by such as this questionnaire and similar
professional instruction and advice.
Retrospectively, it weighs on me too hard. The Clerk
of Court's brochure he gave us gave us no idea it
involved the questions this questionnaire has
raised, nor did the U.S. Attorney presentations. I
was taken.
e. No, it was and honor to serve, and I would do it
again, and this questionnaire is irrelevant: the
federal government led by the people has made this
country great despite humble and inauspicious
beginnings and it is an honor to serve.
f. I've risked my life in war for this country in which
I deeply believe. I will not hesitate to serve as a
federal juror if called, and the personal
inconvenience of service and the doubts about past
service raised by this questionnaire only make me
more eager for further, better juror service for
this country.
g. No, we really were not required to serve long enough
for it to become a distinct personal inconvenience
h. Other: _____________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
149. I have served on juror duty before.
a. Yes, federal grand trial juror service for ____ days
b. Yes, state grand trial juror service for ____ days
c. No, never before
d. No, I was summoned for juror service before but was
disqualified in attorney selection of jurors
05/13/94 @ 4:34 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 54
150. It would not be a serious inconvenience to serve on jury duty
full time at full pay for three to six months every twenty
years as a community ombusperson grand or trial juror, which
is respectively 125 and 250 times average 1990 juror service
if done by all employed persons nationally. (The cost per
employee of 250 fold increase in juror service - six months
full time at full pay every twenty years - is $500 per year
which might be completely offset by decreases in professional
security and professional administration of justice costs,
those professional activities currently (including prisoners
and defense workers and the military) occupying one of every
2.3 other workers in the U.S. economy). (Current total juror
services, state and federal, if paid at the jurors' full
industrial rate, would amount to about 1.2% the cost of police
intake and imprisonment, mere triage).
a. Yes, that sort of improvement and expansion of juror
service would be satisfactory especially if its paid
for by decreased professional security costs
b. No, six months of national, ombudsperson juror service
every twenty years at my first or second choice of
when would be an unacceptable burden
c. I would be willing to pay (circle highest acceptable)
$50 $100 $200 $300 1.5% of wages per year into
a mutual insurance scheme that would pay me full pay
at my regular pay rate up to $80,000 per year, to
serve full time as an ombudsperson juror for six
months at my convenience every twenty years,
providing the insurance scheme is mutual and I'm
paid back not only for juror service but as
professional security costs decrease.
d. I'd be willing to pay a 1/3 subscription to the mutual
insurance scheme described in (c) above, if my
employer paid the other 2/3rds because I believe
that both taxed and non-taxed professional security
costs are primarily a business, not a personal
expense.
e. Improvement and expansion of juror service is
unnecessary
f. Other: _____________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
151. In my experience the real problem is that the criminal courts
and courts generally only pigeonhole people and problems
rather than constructively solve them in a manner which is at
least somehow enabling and enobling to all concerned.
a. Yes, and I do not believe improved juror service can
overcome that problem. Jurors cannot be shadow
05/13/94 @ 4:35 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 55
social workers.
b. Yes, but I believe improved and expanded juror service
might solve that problem. A competent juror is part
detective, part social worker, part international
diplomat sometimes. Giving rubber stamp blank check
judgements to the professional bar is really
subminimal juror service since the bar doesn't
efficiently and constructively solve problems.
c. Yes strife and security problems generally indicate a
failure of administration of justice to either meet
or constructively modify human aspirations
d. Yes, and jurors are supposed to be the quality
control, fourth branch of government and fix it
e. Maybe so, but jurors must not become policy makers nor
social workers. The only purpose jurors can properly
have is to decide between different proposed
findings of fact
f. No, the courts do constructively solve problems,
although it's subtly done
g. No, while it may seem that the courts merely
pigeonhole people, that is all that government is
allowed to do, not try to fundamentally change
individuals. The purposes of law are very limited by
the Constitution.
h. No, the concepts of guilt and blame are constructive
moral necessities, and the courts ably serve those
functions, as do their current juror practice.
Subsequent rehabilitiation of those convicted is
simply a different governmental function which is
and should be kept separate and subordinate.
i. Yes, the courts haven't found a single significant
fact for decades, not even that most grand juries
were only rubber stamps for the government. They're
just pompous assininity.
j. Other: ______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
152. What is wrong with juror service is that, like illiterate
jurors 600 years ago, jurors are still issuing hit-and-run
judgements largely without reasoning them in full writing
complete with minority concurrences, and in the case of grand
jury service even minority dissents, and nobody really
respects hit-and-run action as competent and caring. Juror
judgements should be reasoned in writing and always only
05/13/94 @ 4:36 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard Questionnaire for Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 56
preliminary, never a blank check to anyone, and jurors should
periodically, part-time, in person and by phone, consult with
parties, counsel, assigns, victims, the community, everyone
potentially concerned, and meet periodically to reconsider
their judgement to make sure it is working efficient,
constructive justice, somehow enobling and enabling to all
concerned.
a. Yes, otherwise too much can fall through the cracks
too long
b. Yes, no one in business, nor academia would
conscionably entrust a serious matter to effective
decision made as cavalierly as jury decision if they
could avoid it. Serious decisions require continuing
care and review, precisely the opposite of current
07/08/92 @ 10:56 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questinnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 45
jury practice.
c. Yes, without continuing care, jurors never can
discover errors in the presentation accorded them by
the professional bar
d. Yes, recidivism basically impeaches the jurors and
their community, not just the bar, as having failed
to solve the underlying problems of the case, at the
community's expense
e. Yes, and in grand jury practice, mere indictment fails
to adequately guarantee full and fair and
constructive trial which it is the grand jury's
responsibility to produce if they choose to indict.
f. No, jurors are not elected representatives of the
community. They represent no one but themselves,
and their sole job is the very limited function of
deciding the facts as they are presented and argued.
The question confuses the purpose of juror service
with the purpose of appeal. The Framers provided for
jurors more than trial courts, but they did not say
that jurors are a fourth, quality control branch of
government.
g. No, jurors are not intended to be representatives of
the community. At first jurors were chosen for
their direct knowledge of the offense. The
impartial, uninformed jury, informed by the court
and parties and witnesses is an invention only four
centuries old, and is still a far cry from the
ombudsperson, community representative jurors the
question proposes and the Framers ordained.
h. No, juror service as I have experienced it is
competent and caring and circumspect, and is
unwritten only because its complexity is so great it
defies full written description.
i. Other: ______________________________________________
05/13/94 @ 4:37 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 57
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
153. The American Bar Association has published a Model Grand Jury
Act in the early 1980s which proposes that even in the event
of indictment, defendants must be given adversarial probable
cause hearing before a judicial official, adversary hearing on
cause that caselaw has long opposed when indictment obtains,
on grounds that the grand jurors are basically only a
07/08/92 @ 10:54 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Questionnaire to Paid U.S. Grand Jurors - page 46
private tool of the political prosecutor.
a. Yes, I agree with the ABA: In my experience grand
jurors are mostly rubber stamps for the U.S.
Attorney, and indicted defendants should be given an
adversary probable cause hearing before the
judiciary.
b. No, grand jury determination of probable cause is
adequate and is determinative decision of the
community of a need for full and fair trial, and
should not be subject to judicial review short of
full and fair trial.
c. No, criminals already have too many rights, and should
not be given additional chance to weasel out of
trial on a technicality in a judge hearing and thus
defeat the grand jury.
d. Yes, unless the grand jury hears from the accused
before indicting him.
e. Yes, otherwise there may never be an adversary hearing
on cause where the accused can present his view: the
grand jury does nothing to guarantee full and fair
trial, so without mandatory probable cause hearing
the accused could be denied bail and spun-off into
a nolo or guilty plea bargain for time served
without any adversary hearing on probable cause
let alone a trial.
f. If the American Bar Association recommends it, I'm for
it.
g. No, if the ABA finds grand jury determination
inadequate to fairness, it should improve grand
juror practice, not substitute more professional
bureaucracy.
05/13/94 @ 4:39 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard, U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for Grand Jurors-page 58
h. Other: _____________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
154. There is a view that, although the United States has
conceptually led the entire civilization for the past two
centuries, and now leads economically and militarily, we have
made a fundamental mistake in government which led to rise and
then collapse of Soviet Communism, namely the mistake of
trying to substitute increasing, centripetal, executive
bureaucracy for generalist, grassroots juror regulation anhd
government by the people. The primacy of professional
government and professions generally traces to Mass. v. Mellon
(1923) 262 U.S. 447 which ruled that direct government
administration of the income tax was technologically
infeasible..then. Thence the Soviet experiment in totally
professional government. But the global technology
increasingly confers not only effective political sufferages
but suffrages throughout the world polity increasingly in
agriculture, medicine and phamaceuticals, transport,
information, and even weapons, without providing means to
mediate the frictions those new freedoms create: technology is
a centrifugal force, creating ever greater specialized
constituencies, leading us increasingly to specialized
professional bureaucracies serving specialized constituencies,
centrifugal fiscal deficit chaos, and incompetent plutocracy.
The route back to sanity, where problems would be solved while
small rather than rising to the level where they threaten
basic institutions before they are belatedly apprised and
temporizingly addressed by central government, whether the
problem lies in the credit industry or is civil strife or
nuclear weapons procurement, could be said to lie in improved
and expanded grand and trial juror services to replace the
professional bureaucracies at a grassroots level.
a. Nonsense, unadulterated nonsense! We have the best
Congress and President that money can buy.
b. I resent any implication that any mistake on our part
was responsible for the rise, as distinct from the
fall, of communism. The notion that the rise of
communism was due to dereliction of the juror
systems strains willing suspension of disbelief.
c. That's an interesting view and I tend to agree.
d. For sure, jurors have a lot less sway than
professional bureaucrats, and that may be wrong and
you may have a point.
e. No, that is the view that the jurors are the fourth,
grassroots quality control branch of government, and
that view is wrong. Jurors are simply fact-finders
the Constitution and laws require, nothing more, nor
05/13/94 @ 4:40 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for Grand Jurors - page 59
should they be anything more.
f. Other: ______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
155. Early during the Tehran Hostage Crisis, on 9 December 1979,
the government of Iran radically altered its demand structure,
calling for an investigation by a Presentment capable federal
grand jury, New York Times front page 12/10/79, although the
Iranian government knew that that would lead to trial only in
the U.S. of the Shah under 18 USC 960 (felony war) and the
students who'd seized the embassy under 18 USC 1201
(kidnapping), and release of the hostages, and would not lead
to extradition of the Shah to Iran for trial as the students
and mullahs had demanded. Of course, the deal fell through
and Iran never did get access to a Presentment capable federal
grand jury, and the hostage crisis dragged on unsolved. But
the idea is worthy of consideration, and is basically that
hostaging should not be automatically treated as a "terrorism"
problem for the political branch police, but rather treated
juridically by a Presentment capable grand jury hearing the
complaints of the hostagers or even prosecuting the government
under 18 USC 1512 (obstruction
of the witness of the hostagers) and Presenting the hostagers
under 18 USC 1201 (kidnapping) to let a trial jury hear their
Necessity Defense that token hostaging was the only way
available to them to get judicial standing to right a more
serious wrong. And in cases of international hostaging, the
grand jury should condition its Presentment against the
foreign hostagers upon their freedom to obtain a second
opinion verdict from any other justice system in the whole
world, differences between the U.S. and foreign verdicts to be
resolved by the International Court of Justice, giving that
court no power but procedural remand among the two competing
national justice systems.
a. No, hostaging should be labelled as terrorism and
handled by the political police. Otherwise Arabs
would routinely subject Americans to token hostaging
to bring charges against our arming the Israelis to
routinely bomb and strafe Arabs for example.
b. Yes, we should have given the Bani-Sadr regime and the
Iranian engineering students access to grand and
trial juror process to juridically solve the hostage
05/13/94 @ 4:41 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 60
05/13/94 @ 4:46 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 60
crisis, even if it resulted in conviction of past
administrations for arming the Shah for hostilities
against his own people with whom we had no quarrel
and were formally at peace.
c. No, you can't trust terrorists to properly use law,
and they should not be given the chance.
d. No, jurors and courts should not be given any role in
international affairs
e. Yes, juror and juridical response to hostaging,
treating it simply as erzatz marshalling and having
its merits or their lack tested by full and fair
grand and trial jury process might significantly
reduce strife and terrorism to polite token
hostaging until all the world's justice systems
became accessible and responsive to everyone.
f. It does not surprise me that the Beirut hostaging
began only after the Lebanese found out what had
really happened in the Tehran Hostage Crisis, in
1985, and realized we were responsible for the
Israeli invasion of Lebanon that had murdered some
30,000 in that country of only 3.4 million. And as
for their bombing of the Marine barracks in 1983, we
sent those 12,000 assault troops into that country
that had 60,000 under arms in over a dozen factions
without even knowing how many our Israeli allies had
murdered, not even to the nearest 10,000, according
to Defense Intelligence Agency in 1986.
g. Tell us how Judge Sofaer and the FBI caused the
bombing of Pam Am 103 on 12/21/88.
h. Other: ____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
156. As a grand juror, I had to go through the metal detector
weapons search routine like the general public every time
I went to the courthouse.
a. Yes
b. No, I had a pass
c. Yes, but the professionals had passes.
157. In Graham Greene's novel, The Heart of the Matter, the
colonial Africa police commissioner, Major Scobie, thinks "A
police man would be the most forgiving person in the world if
only he knew all the facts, if only he could know all the
facts."
05/13/94 @ 4:47 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 61
a. I don't know about the police - they can be pretty
crazy - but I feel that way in my grand juror work
and would rather use law to solve problems than to
push anyone around.
b. Scobie sounds like a bleeding heart liberal to me. I
don't agree.
c. What was that, "The White Man's Burden?" nonsense.
d. Scobie was a Catholic fatalist. I'm not. I hold people
responsible for their actions.
e. There is a real question, even implied in non-locality
in quantum mechanics, that probable cause and the
action of the proximate agent, the "perpetrator,"
may be quite separate and different, and that
individual autonomy and thus individual responsibily
in actions which have social effect may be pretty
limited. This is a dicey business.
f. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
__________________________________________________.
158. Have you or a close friend, in the past 10 years, been a
victim of:
a. A violent crime? _____________
b. A property crime? ____________
c. A government crime? __________
d. A fraud? _____________________
e. A mass media fraud? __________
159. Did your grand jury take any care to help the victim(s) of the
of the crimes on which you commissioned defendancy by
indictment and presentment
a. Yes ______________________________________________
________________________________________________
b. No.
c. Other ____________________________________________
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
_______________________________________________.
160. Have you written and sent within the last 3 years:
a. A letter to the editor? ______________
b. A group or corporate policy letter on a social issue?
_______________
c. A letter to Congress? ___________
d. A letter to the President? ______
161. Do you (feel obliged to)
a. Lock your door(s) when you leave home for less than
05/13/94 @ 4:48 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 62
one hour? ____________
b. Lock your doors and windows when you leave home
for less than one hour? __________________
c. Carry a weapon when you travel at night? __________
d. Stay indoors at night? ___________
e. Carry a firearm in your car? ___________
f. Subscribe to a private security service for your home?
___________________
g. Participate in a neighborhood watch program? ________
h. Make it a point to make an annual financial
contribution to the police? _____________
162. I agree with mandatory minimum imprisonment sentencing.
a. Yes, it's the only way one can jail white collar
crooks.
b. No, it overcrowds prisons with non-violent drug
possession offenders.
c. No, but a mandatory minimum community service
provision would be great.
d. I agree with the idea of life imprisonment without
parole for 3 time violent offenders.
e. Yes, it's an effective deterrent.
f. No, prospective punishment is not an effective
deterrent as distinct from merely an incentive to
secrecy and flight from prosecution.
g. No, it just gives the government attorneys the power
to determine sentence and make people rat out their
friends for leniency and avoid trial by plea
bargain.
h. Other _____________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
________________________________________________.
163. The War on Drugs and War on Crime, now 2 decades old are:
a. Real, Pyrrhic, civil war by the government.
b. A failure
c. A necessary evil
d. Racist
e. Only apply against the poor
f. Wrecking the country
g. Show that the courts and juror services are
subminimal.
h. A government protection racket
i. Other ______________________________________________
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________.
164. I support the use of the death penalty.
a. Yes, but we should execute more
05/13/94 @ 4:49 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Qustionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 63
b. Yes, it's an effective deterrent
c. Only for the crimes of ______________________________
___________________________________________________
__________________________________________________.
d. No, it's application is racially biased.
e. No, it's application is economically biased.
f. There are a lot of influential war criminals out there
walking free in high places.
g. No, it's immoral, is terroristic towards the people.
h. No, it means the state is too weak to make any
constructive use of the life of a prisoner over whom
it has near total control.
i. There are currently over 23,000 murders per year, so
we should execute about ___________ (number) of
convicted murderers per year.
j. We should only execute about ________ (number) total
per year.
165. The BATF and FBI used unreasonable seizure, in both manner and
effect, in the Waco case and should have been charged, tried,
and convicted for it including convicted for involuntary
manslaughter (lawful action - they did have warrants - which
causes death due to lack of due care and circumspection).
a. Absolutely
b. Maybe
c. You don't really expect the government to charge
it's own thugs do you, and forget the right of
private criminal complaint at 18 USC 1512(c)(4)
because the bench and clerks never allow it.
d. Yes, and the magistrate and judge and U.S. Attorney in
Waco too who should have furnished due process to
the Branch Davidians while the FBI was holding them
under house arrest in their compound, even though
they were still armed.
e. The police agencies are really pretty perverse cults
like the Branch Davidians were, and so is the bar.
f. No, they were only doing their duty.
h. Yes, I would have liked to see a trial where the
officials tried to claim a Public Authority defense
under 18 USC Rule 12.3
i. Lot's of luck: the government is the biggest organized
crime in the country
j. That would have been nice, but let's remember one of
the reasons it happened in Western District of Texas
is that they have the 4th weakest grand juror
services in the whole country, only 23.7 minutes of
session time per felony defendant in 1992. If they
weren't so weak, BATF and FBI wouldn't have been
allowed to blow up there. That was the real probable
cause of the tragedy. That WDTX(Waco) rubber stamp
grand jury wouldn't ever charge cops for something
05/13/94 @ 4:50 EDT @ Limerick PA, USA
Ballard U.S. Grand Jury Questionnaire for U.S. Grand Jurors-page 64
like that. Gutless pantywaists.
l. They should at least have to pay for the sneak attack
that led to the fire that killed the little kids.
m. Other _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
___________________________________________________.
166. Criminal trial should teach the public the personal and
impersonal causes of a serious harm, and if it's federal,
those of similar harms throughout at least the whole district
if not the nation and world and propose how to prevent sequel
harms in the general case so the public can better prevent
sequel harms.
a. Yes
b. No, just help the cops, the professionals, catch and lock
up the perpetrators for professional political police
profit, and hire more cops. Rodney King had it coming.
c. Help the public, smublic: that's where the perpetrators
come from. Build more prisons and gas chambers, or better
yet, execute murderers by popping them feet first into
tree shredders...and anyone who uses TCDD. Fear is an
excellent teacher. Spare the rod spoil the child as they
say in Singapore. What it takes is more corporal
punishment and more capital punishment.
d. I oughta knock you off with a letter bomb for writing such
garbage. Take your quantum mechanics and shove it (but
not my own transistors mind you): the civilization runs
on individual responsibility and accountability (except
for government agents) or runs amok. There are no
impersonal causes of harm, except God-made natural
disasters. There are only good people and bad people and
nailing the bad guys is doing God's work.
e. Other __________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________.
