Critics: Secret Grand Jury Process Raises Questions

Raleigh, N.C. — Critics argue a secret grand jury process makes it difficult for the public to see both sides of a court case.

On Wednesday, a grand jury voted not to indict Christopher Long. The former New Hanover County deputy sheriff shot and killed 18-year-old Peyton Strickland while serving an arrest warrant as part of a team of heavily armed deputies.

"They (law enforcement officers) don't have the reflection time that reporters and lawyers do. We get to develop our arguments and think them out," attorney Michael McGuinness said to a group of reporters.

When a previous grand jury said it mistakenly had indicted Long on murder charges by checking the wrong box on a form, Long's brief time in custody allowed a glimpse into the prosecutor's evidence. At a bond hearing, it was discovered that Long told investigators he mistook the sound of his own officers breaking down a door as gunfire.

There are no transcripts of grand jury testimony, and jurors are sworn to secrecy. Attorney Robert Nunley said he believes the process should be more open.

"When there's not transparency, that plays into the conspiracy theorists," he said.

If special prosecutors took the case to a grand jury, he said, they must have believed criminal charges were justified. As a defense attorney for both police officers and criminal defendants, he said he sees both sides.

"That's a tragedy. A kid's lost his life. It's a tragedy for the officer. I believe he's probably devastated by this," Nunley said.

The grand jury based its decision Wednesday on testimony from Long, the teen's father and investigators.

The Attorney General's office does not plan to release an investigative report on the case. The Strickland family may consider a civil suit against the former deputy.

43 Comments

WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.

VIEW ALL 43 COMMENTS

This story is closed for comments.

Latest Comments

Rock21, you are poorly informed. The incident happened at a house, not an apartment. The rest of what you wrote was pure dribble and I will not comment on it

nowayeddy
July 13, 2007 7:16 p.m.

Inter Alios, wrong, it is not public information, if it is, please provide a web address. Since the clerk office is online, I would be able to find it. Put up, or shut up

nowayeddy
July 13, 2007 7:14 p.m.

"nowayeddy" - Your name, as a member of the grand jury, is a public record. Anyone who wants to know can obtain the information from the Clerk of Court. The public's business should be conducted in public. There is no valid reason for grand jury proceedings to be secret. Originally, the grand jury protected citizens from the government. As it has evolved over the years into secrecy, it protects law enforcement and the prosecution from their shenanigans. Citizens are indicted when the prosecution knows full well evidence does not exist to convict. People are kept in jail under such indictments for months or even years under bail bonds so high there is no possibility the accused could be released pending trial. The idea is...to coerce a guilty plea just to get out of jail. That is just flat wrong any way you look at it.

ghwhitaker1_old
July 13, 2007 10:20 a.m.

Even tough I think he should have been indicted, I feel the privacy requirement should not change. I was on a GJ once. After seeing what really goes on around here, I would not want some defendants to have access to me. There are some very disturbed people in the world. Seems if you want the bad guys to get to court, let the people who do the intial review of the case have their privacy, so that they don't have to worry about revenge. The courts can hash out any of the garbage charges that get thru. By the wat, it is my experience from interviewing the police during the hearings, some will lie to get the indictment. Most or honest, some are worse than the criminals though.

nowayeddy
July 12, 2007 11:06 p.m.

The Deputy was doing his job. He was authorized by higher authorities to go to the apartment with his SWAT Team and take down the criminals. The responsibility lies with the system that allows this. In 1966 the Texas Tower sniper had killed fourteen people and injured dozens more in a little over ninety minutes. Because the police had no type of training to deal with this type of public violence SWAT teams were formed. They are definately needed for those violent public situations. They are not needed to assault homes and private property. All they had to was put these guys under surveillance and capture them when it was safe to do so. If they become violent and agressive then take them out. As long as the system justifies these assaults it responsible and not the pawns. He is going to lead a very troubled life because of his actions. Those responsible for putting him there are not even questioned in any type of way, let alone a by grand jury.