Skip to main content

The Banality of Grand Juries

I’ve always been taken with the phrase “banality of evil,” and I’ve found it useful in a variety of contexts. But mostly I’ve associated it with my own experience serving on two grand juries. That’s two more than anybody I know.

The banality of grand juries derives, not so much from evil as from one of its cousins, stupidity, an apt descriptor for the cavalcade of crimes a grand juror routinely encounters.

Case after case, crime after crime, day after day, ten or so cases a day. For a month. Almost all the cases are mind-numbingly banal — stupid people doing stupid things quite stupidly.

I served in Manhattan, probably in the same courthouse where Trump’s newly appointed grand jury will sit. Different grand juries serve different purposes, and Trump’s will be quite different from either of mine. But the basics are the same. So is the banality.

A grand jury is neither grand nor a jury. It’s more like a committee, but with a certain official power. There are sixteen of us on the panel, and we’ve taken on a serious, if not exactly grand, responsibility: we vote on whether to indict a person alleged to have committed a crime. With our approval, the City of New York can allocate taxpayer money to the prosecution and possible trial of said person. 

We work, famously, in secret. Nobody is privy to our deliberations. There are no notes or communications with the outside, only the dry record of an indictment officially handed down. A simple majority of us is enough to indict. But we are almost always unanimous.

That’s because our panel is led by the nose by whichever Assistant District Attorney (ADA) is prosecuting the case at hand. Our life is one long assembly line of ADAs presenting banal cases with banal precision, reading aloud each count being charged.

They also read the specific statutes that apply to those counts. Each statute must be read in its entirety, no matter how many times we’ve heard it before. Insurance contracts are more exciting.

The ADAs who rule our world are there to bring indictments, period. If their cases weren’t open-and-shut, they wouldn’t be there. The cliché that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich is largely true, but woe to the ADA who fails to make an airtight case against that sandwich. That would be the very essence of incompetence.

Because in a grand jury the defense gets no say. We’re all about the prosecution. Neither the defendant nor the defendant’s lawyer will ever enter our room. As a defendant, you absolutely have the right to appear before us, but only after waiving all immunity. This would be utter lunacy, since in effect you’d be giving yourself permission to provide evidence against yourself. No competent defense lawyer would allow this. In the hundred-or-so cases I heard, it happened only once, and it was pathetic.

Defense lawyers will, of course, get their say once the indictment is handed down. They will get to make motions. They will get to see and impugn the evidence against their client. They will get to negotiate plea deals, cooperation agreements, and grants of immunity. In rare instances, they will go to trial. But all that comes later. In our little world, the defense doesn't exist.

As for the ADAs, they are uniformly buttoned-up and professional. But while they’re all capable prosecutors, they’re mostly journeymen, still coming up through the ranks.

The Trump grand jury, on the other hand, will be treated to the best prosecutors taxpayer money can buy. Big-time badass lawyers, every last one. Each will have deep experience in white collar crime — from financial fraud to money laundering to racketeering. And you can bet they’ll be thinking about conspiracy charges as well — the kind that draw twenty years.

Which doesn’t mean this grand jury will be any less banal than mine. It’s just that in this case, it will be about the banality of numbers. Lots of them.

Prosecutions for financial crimes are almost always based on numbers, and unlike Trump, numbers don’t lie. It’s the accountants, not the cops, who usually nail the racketeers, most famously Al Capone on tax evasion. Top-notch forensic accountants have been working for months, maybe years, poring over all sorts of Trump-related numbers, and they know the kinds of crimes those numbers usually reveal.

The challenge for the prosecutors will be to get all those numbers to tell a story so simple, even a juror can understand it. In that sense, the grand jury will serve as a sort of dry run for a possible trial down the road.

The story they tell will be distilled from millions of pages of tax returns, bank records, real estate contracts, insurance valuations, loan applications, and all manner of excruciatingly dull paperwork.

It will not be riveting. But it will be devastating.

This particular grand jury has been convened for six months (though it could be much more, or much less). Over that time, they might hear one long case or dozens of short ones. They might hear one witness or a hundred. There’s no way of knowing.

We can be sure they’ll hear witnesses, not just against Trump, but also against Alan Weisselberg — unless he flips first, in which case he’ll pop up as a witness. In my dreams, they’ll also be hearing allegations against Trump’s entire family, as well as an assortment of ancillary figures in their orbit.

But with so much at stake, and so much legal firepower being brought to it, there is no way this panel won’t indict. Especially since it’s New York City, which reeked of Trump long before the rest of the country. It’s a foregone conclusion that these prosecutors will have rock solid cases on every count of every crime for every perpetrator. No grand jury has ever resisted that.

Of course, a grand jury is just the first step in the process. An important step, yes, but ultimately far less significant than subsequent ones. Once there’s an indictment, each case becomes a matter of who pleas out, who cooperates, and who flips on whom.

It also becomes a matter of how skilled — and how motivated — the opposing attorneys are. And whether they’ve been paid in advance. And whether the check has cleared. This is Trump, after all.

But by then, the grand jury will have done its official but banal job. It will have looked at the evidence, discussed it for at least ten minutes, and unanimously decided that you, Mr. Trump, are in deep, deep shit.


Comments

  1. I anticipate the nonsensical drivel that will spew from The Trumpadumpa's foul mouth after indictment. He will convict himself. Also I suggest a betting pool on how often the word "unfair," is babbled and another for the phrase, "witch hunt."

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Trouble with Old White Guys

  In the spirit of the holidays, I’m re-gifting a piece I wrote in late November of the blighted year 2020. Post-election, pre-vaccine, it has nothing to do with the holidays, or even with good spirits. Nor is it especially topical. I’m recycling it mostly because I still like it. It still feels more-or-less true. It isn’t too dated. And I know some of my newer readers haven’t read it. For those of you who have — you know who you are — I invite you to take a second look. No pressure. I had a zoom call the other day with an old friend I’d neither seen nor communicated with in about five years. We schmoozed and caught up and trashed Republicans and shared our amazement over this whole pandemic thing, and then he said something I had to think about: “It’s not a bad time to be old.” Hmm. To be sure, it’s a great time to not struggle in the job market. It’s an excellent time to not worry where your next meal is coming from. It’s a sensational time to not be raising

Consumer Power and the Promise of Negative Branding

By now it’s pretty clear that Republicans are out to steal your lunch money. If they take back the House, it will be two years of committee hearings for Hunter Biden and two more years of festering stasis for the rest of us. So we need ideas, fast. I am one of many who believe at least part of the answer lies in the business world. Corporate America needs to step up. Large corporations have significant financial leverage over Republicans at every level — federal, state, local — and we need them to use that leverage to get us out of this mess, not just for our sakes, but for their own as well. It is inexcusable that hundreds of mega-companies continue to contribute to the campaigns of Republican congressmen who openly denied the 2020 election results. These companies continue, in other words, to finance treason. This is appalling on any number of levels, but let’s start with whether they’re getting their money’s worth. The Republican agenda they underwrite is so corrupt, so co

What’s it Like Out on That Limb, Liz?

Let me start by saying that Liz Cheney is not my favorite person. Heir to Dick Cheney, one of the foulest public figures of the last century, she was born on the wrong side of every issue. Only rarely has she strayed from the toxic values of her father. She voted with Trump 93 percent of the time. Including the $2 trillion tax boondoggle of 2017, which no doubt added a few million to her own estate, and several multiples of that to her daddy’s. That said, one can’t help but begrudgingly look on, with some tiny bit of admiration, at the limb she has intentionally — and with eyes wide open —slithered out on. Unlike the Democrats on the Jan 6 committee — who are only trying to save democracy — Cheney has arguably a more difficult job. She seems to have taken it upon herself to be the one to take down Donald Trump. Or barring that, to exorcise him from the Republican party. Both are tall orders, and to make them happen, she has to work closely with Democrats, whom she despises. And