Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: LA Grand Juries Are Refusing to Indict ICE Protestors [View all]ancianita
(41,947 posts)15. It takes three seconds to find on Google's DeepMind AI:
In criminal law, a "no bill" from a grand jury is a significant decision indicating that the evidence presented against a defendant is insufficient to justify a trial. It's also known as a "not a true bill".
A grand jury's role is to assess whether there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, not to determine guilt or innocence. A "no bill" signifies that the grand jury didn't find enough evidence to establish probable cause.
The immediate consequence of a "no bill" is that the criminal charges are dropped or dismissed. The individual is not formally charged and is spared the need for a trial.
It's crucial to understand that a "no bill" is not the same as an acquittal or a finding of innocence. It simply means the prosecution lacked sufficient evidence at that particular time
Grand jury proceedings, including a "no bill" decision, are usually kept confidential to protect the reputation of individuals investigated but not charged. This means the defendant might not even learn the specific reasons behind the grand jury's decision.
In essence, a "no bill" is a positive outcome for the person being investigated as it halts the criminal proceedings against them, at least for the present. However, it's not a definitive exoneration and carries the possibility of a future indictment if new evidence comes to light.
A grand jury's role is to assess whether there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, not to determine guilt or innocence. A "no bill" signifies that the grand jury didn't find enough evidence to establish probable cause.
The immediate consequence of a "no bill" is that the criminal charges are dropped or dismissed. The individual is not formally charged and is spared the need for a trial.
It's crucial to understand that a "no bill" is not the same as an acquittal or a finding of innocence. It simply means the prosecution lacked sufficient evidence at that particular time
Grand jury proceedings, including a "no bill" decision, are usually kept confidential to protect the reputation of individuals investigated but not charged. This means the defendant might not even learn the specific reasons behind the grand jury's decision.
In essence, a "no bill" is a positive outcome for the person being investigated as it halts the criminal proceedings against them, at least for the present. However, it's not a definitive exoneration and carries the possibility of a future indictment if new evidence comes to light.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=What+is+%22no+billing%22+from+a+grand+jury%3F%3F&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
48 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

I am so pleased to read that some grand juries are refusing to indict Ice protestors.
CaliforniaPeggy
Jul 24
#1
Wait, they are trying to deny justice to people who are not Trrumpers. That is a no no no. No.
twodogsbarking
Jul 24
#8
Thanks for reading it. I meant to say "deny" instead of "do". I srewed up. Mea culpa.
twodogsbarking
Jul 24
#21
This is why we need regular people to answer their jury duty summons!
questionseverything
Jul 24
#12
Is it "jury nullification" or a righteous reaction to "trumped up" charges?
Midnight Writer
Jul 24
#27
I don't think this is nullification, that happens if jurors believe the defendant technically broke the law
questionseverything
Jul 24
#34