CA: Burglary suspect sues homeowner who defended himself

[57Coastie]

The case went to the jury yesterday:

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts ... ense-takes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I only want to point out that when a defendant goes to trial for a felony, the case has passed numerous hurdles:

• The police investigated it. A crime of this serious and complicated nature would be investigated pretty thoroughly.
• The DA decided to prefer charges.
• The grand jury agreed that probable cause existed.
• At any number of procedural steps the judge could have dismissed a charge or the entire case.

Can this system go wrong because of incompetence or malice, sure. That's why the jury is the final finder of fact. The jury can find not guilty just because the prosecution's arguments or the evidence don't pass the sniff test.

- Jim

Not always, Jim. Not always. Perhaps the matter did go to a GJ. I wouldn't know. If I were the DA I would most likely send it to a GJ. Mr. Allen can perhaps clarify for us whether or not a Grand Jury must act prior to a felony prosecution in California.

But more importantly, none of this does away with the presumption of innocence.

I haven't seen a verdict, but nothing contrary to what we have already heard appeared to have been brought forward in closing arguments, so I will not be surprised to see said presumption vanish.

Jim

[seamusTX]

But more importantly, none of this does away with the presumption of innocence.

I haven't seen a verdict,...

The defendant was found guilty on all counts today (Wednesday).

I can't say whether he was indicted by a grand jury. I know almost nothing about California law, but I would think charges of three of the most serious crimes on the books would go before a grand jury.

The presumption of innocence means that the state must prove its case without begging the question (i.e., "if you weren't guilty you wouldn't be on trial").

However, commentators such as ourselves who have no influence on the case can draw our own conclusions.

- Jim

[WildBill]

But more importantly, none of this does away with the presumption of innocence.

I haven't seen a verdict,...

The defendant was found guilty on all counts today (Wednesday).

I can't say whether he was indicted by a grand jury. I know almost nothing about California law, but I would think charges of three of the most serious crimes on the books would go before a grand jury.

The presumption of innocence means that the state must prove its case without begging the question (i.e., "if you weren't guilty you wouldn't be on trial").

However, commentators such as ourselves who have no influence on the case can draw our own conclusions.

- Jim

In California, they don't use the grand jury like Texas. In California, when a person is arrested on felony charges they have a preliminary hearing in municipal court where the DA presents an abbreviated case in front of a judge to determine if there is probable cause that a felony was committed and that the defendent committed it.

During the preliminary hearing the DA presents just enough evidence to convince the judge to decide whether or not to bind the defendant to a trial in the Superior Court. The DA can present evidence and witnesses and the defense attorney can cross examine. I don't know the percentages, but most all of the defendants are bound to the superior court after the prelim.
Oh, I forgot. IANAL.

[JALLEN]

The DA can obtain an indictment from the Grand Jury or file an Information(or Felony Complaint), which proceeds with a preliminary hearing, at which the DA presents evidence, defense cross examines, etc, and the question for the judge is whether the DA has proven a good enough case to justify a full blown trial, in which case the defendant is "bound over for trial." No weighing of evidence, etc just enough to show probable cause that a crime has been committed and that the defendant committed it.

[recaffeination]

But more importantly, none of this does away with the presumption of innocence.

I agree. The homeowner should get the presumption of innocence, even in CA, until the plaintiff proves his case.