Officials explain possible reasons Sutter County jurors chose not to release a report
The 2017-18 Sutter County Grand Jury elected to not publish a report. The jurors reportedly all resigned as their term was ending; and there has been no official explanation of what happened or why there was no report published.
In her 11 years of training grand jurors and participating in the process, Beckie Jennings, California Grand Jurors’ Association Sutter County chapter president, said she has never seen a grand jury fail to release a report.
“I have a high level of concern over the 17 people who voted to not issue a report and resign,” Jennings said. “I don’t violate the law, so I don’t know what happened, but it appears to me that they were very concerned they weren’t being protected. Their silence is a huge statement.”
Online archives dating back to 1989 for Yuba County and 2001 in Sutter County show that it hasn’t happened in that time. Local residents aren’t likely to learn why it wasn’t released either, considering the fact that jurors are sworn to secrecy and risk being charged with a misdemeanor if they break their oath.
“The Sutter Superior Court recognizes and values the dedicated service of all Sutter County Grand Jurors – past, present, and future – and is committed to maintaining the integrity of the grand jury process. As you know, the Court cannot comment on specific grand jury matters, as those matters are confidential by operation of law,” said Sutter County Superior Court Presiding Judge Brian Aronson.
Nonetheless, putting together the report, or even going through the process, is a costly endeavor.
Yuba County budgeted $34,100 for its grand jury in Fiscal Year 2017/18.
Sutter County initially approved an allocation of $40,448 last year, but it was adjusted after the grand jury indicated to the Board of Supervisors that it had need for an attorney for legal advice. That request upped the budget for the fiscal year to $50,448 – only $1,114.97 wasn’t used and will roll over to the next grand jury, said Chuck Smith, public information officer for the county.
Responses to the following questions about the typical grand jury process were provided by Aronson, Jennings and Bonnie Sloan, executive officer for the Yuba County Superior Court.
Q: Can you provide a general rundown of the grand jury process?
A: A grand jury – composed of volunteers who reside in the county in which they serve – is charged with investigating and reporting on the operations of local government agencies, Sloan said.
Aronson said two particular sections of the penal code set forth the investigatory obligations of a grand jury.
According to the penal code, the grand jury: may inquire into the case of every person imprisoned in the county jail on a criminal charge; shall inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons within the county; shall inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct in office of public officers of every description with the county – except when it involves a shooting or use of excessive force by a peace officer that led to the death of a person; and shall investigate and report on the operations, accounts, and records of the officers, departments or functions of the county, with the caveat that the grand jury not duplicate any examination of financial statements performed by or for the Board of Supervisors.
“A Grand Jury can elect, on its own, to not submit a final report. The Court is not aware of any authority by which it can compel a Grand Jury to submit a final report,” Aronson said.
Jennings said there are several ways a grand jury will decide upon what to investigate, whether it be a schematic that shows what departments haven’t been looked into recently, a citizen’s complaint or by word of mouth. No matter the subject, the majority of jurors must agree to proceed with an investigation before one can be initiated.
“When they do their investigation, they have the power of subpoena. They take witness testimony sworn under oath. They are told they cannot go out of the room and talk about it as the information is protected by the law,” Jennings said.
Once a report is drafted, the jury will spend time editing for spelling and grammar errors and will look for concerns of liability before voting on whether to send it to the advising judge for official filing, Jennings said.
Q: Is a judge required to sign off on a grand jury report before it is published?
A: Sloan said a grand jury can release a report without approval of an advising judge with the exception of redacting “raw evidence,” which could be legal opinions, transcripts, summaries of interviews, documentary evidence or any information exposing the identity of a person who provided information to the grand jury.
A judge cannot seal or edit a report because he or she disagrees with the conclusion, but the purpose of reviewing a report is to prevent the official filing of an illegal report, she said.
“The California Supreme Court has stated: ‘If a proposed grand jury report exceeds legal limits, the superior court which convenes the grand jury and which is responsible for its supervision may properly refuse to file the report,’” Aronson said.
Q: What would be some reasons for not signing off on a report, in broad terms?
A: Aronson said there may be many reasons a report may not be published as submitted.
The penal code states that before a judge grants approval, he or she “may require the redaction or masking of any part of the evidentiary material, findings or other information to be released to the public including, but not limited to, the identity of witnesses and any testimony of materials of a defamatory or libelous nature.”
Aronson also said that a grand jury shall make no report, declaration or recommendation “on any matter except on the basis of its own investigation of the matter made by such grand jury,” which is included in the penal code.
Q: Is it legal for a jury member to state publicly why they are choosing not to publish a report and/or why he or she chose to resign?
A: Aronson said judges are not permitted to comment on the legality of particular issues. However, he directed attention to three sections of the penal code that deal with confidentiality.
The short answer is no, jurors are not allowed to speak about the process.
Jurors swear an oath not to disclose any evidence brought before them, conversations with other jurors or the manner in which jurors voted on a particular manner. Any individuals that willfully discloses that evidence – except when required by a court – is guilty of a misdemeanor.
“It’s crucial to protect the witnesses,” Jennings said. “The grand jury looks at a lot of things that don’t actually make it into the report. If we were to talk about those things, we could damage people’s livelihoods and businesses. It’s a protection for a lot of reasons.”
Jennings said California is the last state to have a functional grand jury system, which is protected under the state constitution.
July 21, 2018
Marysville Appeal-Democrat
By Jake Abbott
No comments:
Post a Comment