414:
Instead, petit jurors are asked to fill out a form if they are willing to participate on a grand jury. Grand jurors are chosen only from those who have agreed to commit themselves to the 4-month term. For that reason, many grand jurors are retirees or citizens otherwise able to commit themselves to a 4-month term. In
Baltimore City, grand juries have a second duty aside from indicting people. Each term, a judge of the Circuit Court issues a "charge" to the grand jury to study, research and investigate a particular issue of public policy and to report any problems or recommendations for improvement. In the past, grand juries have explored a variety of issues including healthcare access for incarcerated offenders, drug addiction, child support enforcemen options and alternatives to incarceration for non-violent offenders.
31:
85:
64:
95:
855:
cases relying upon that power deal strictly with the courts' control over their own procedures, whereas the grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside." This is a clearly wordered opinion in direct contradiction to the most reasonable interpretation of the first sentence of the
Knowledge (XXG) article: "A grand jury is an arm of the court".
22:
169:
209:
311:. We relate "jury" to an unbiased group of people who are equally selected by the prosecutor and defendant. This is not the case with a Grand Jury. What is unfair about the word "jury" is that when you hear that someone has been "indicted by a Grand Jury", you tend to think that person was tried and convicted; thus, persumed guilty before trial.
267:. The prosecution may use either method, at its option. Typically the preliminary hearing method is used when a suspect is arrested by the police (say, with a person caught in the act), while the grand jury method is used after a lengthy investigation concludes a particular suspect is guilty and should be charged (say, with
1173:
By all means, feel free to add back in material that you think is notable and supported by reliable sources on either article. I am a bit confused I guess about primary vs. secondary - I get that primary is allowed in some cases, but secondary helps to establish notability. That's why I removed a lot
1084:
or equivalent in most of the rest of Europe. The judgement (opinion) being exercised is "are there a reasonable grounds for a case (accusation) to go to trial". There is no possibility of a guilty or not guilty verdict since the case for the defence has not been heard. So there is no finding of truth
661:
I did not add any more than I did #1- to keep it simple, #2- I am new and figured a simple edit would be left alone. Louisiana could probably have a seperate law section because the whole system(based largely on
Napoleonic code)is unique by U.S. standards and common law. There is not even reciprocity
808:
I agree and request that its author(s) or supporter(s) should not simply put it back in again. If such criticisms can be found to be discussed in reliable sources, such as articles in scholarly law journals, that material should be in here. But the sources cited in notes 21 through 23 to the section
395:
It depends on the jurisdiction, but I believe many do it the same way as New York. In NY, the Grand Jury is made up of 23 citizens picked randomly from the jury pool. Generally, they sit for 4 weeks and hear as many cases as are available in that time period. There are also "special" Grand Juries
1141:
has been disrupted by the systematic mass removal of apparently relevant accurate verifiable content, apparently in an attempt to force a merger. For example, merely quoting the Fifth
Amendment verbatim (as opposed to inserting an original interpretation or analysis or explanation etc of it) is not
869:
I appreciate having available a clearly worded legal opinion, but for me at least, this has not brought clear understanding. After the specific statement that a grand jury is separate from, and not presided over by, the courts, every described facet of operations for a grand jury seems to involve a
500:
the new version was not wikified or formatted properly (until somebody fixed the latter), and was written by an editor with no other contribs before or since. The former two were fixable and the last doesn't disqualify anybody from editing, of course; but they are reasons to be skeptical about how
413:
In
Maryland, Grand Juries are similarly made up of 23 citizens of whichever County (or city) the grand jury will be sitting in. However, grand juries in Maryland serve 4 month terms (chosen every January, May and September). Because of this long tenure, they are not picked completely at random.
366:
The time I was called for jury duty (In TN), it appeared to me during oriention that all the members of the grand jury were chosen out of those trying to get out of regular jury duty, (in that county an on-call basis for six weeks.) By contrast, the Grand Jury was only expected to take the rest of
336:
What if the grand jury were a fourth level of our tri-level government, that is composed of people of the land, (not people who fill official elected seats of government), and the constitution does not restrict them in any way nor govern them by legislation? If the tri-level government uses checks
301:
I came to this page hoping to find the answer to one question--is a grand jury made up of the same (random) people as a regular jury, or is a seat on a grand jury an elected or appointed position, or what? Thanks for all your help! I also came looking for this information. Any additions in this
1045:
Unless I read the main article too quickly, in terms of how the Grand jury (federal) currently operates in the US, how are the people who sit on the Grand jury chosen? Are there specific qualifications or disqualifications? And how is an impartial selection achieved? Can a jury be chosen who's
1026:
process or is it simply whoever is grabbed? Is it a full-time commitment for a period of time (open-ended or closed-ended)? Etc. I am sure the answer to this has been different in different times & places, but I'm sure there is some pattern. For example, I'm sure that at some point these were
823:
A "Criticism" section by definition has a strong POV against the subject being criticized. Andaries, just because you didn't like it (or because you didn't like one of the references), you signed up for a
Knowledge (XXG) account, and removed the entire section? How neutral is that? Please also be
496:
suspected copyvio: the entire article was rewritten in one single edit, as though copied-and-pasted. Furthermore, the original second sentence (before somebody fixed it) began "In the United States we have two juries..." which suggests the text was written as some sort of essay or lecture, not an
472:
Is there someone that can help me understand things more? Is there an editor or someone with experience that can add my section back? I like to think I contributed important information and do not know how(or care to learn) about editing wars. If additional citation is needed I will provide this.
975:
In the lede it is asserted that grand juries range in size from 16 to 23 jurors. But in
Missouri it is 12, as stated in numerous recent discussions about the grand jury that has begun hearing the case about the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. At least one such possible reference
919:
With regard to arrest, timing appears to be key: "whether at the facts and circumstances within knowledge , and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information, sufficient to warrant a prudent in believing that had committed or was committing an offense." In particular, probable cause
854:
In 112 S.Ct. 1735 504 U.S. 36 118 L.Ed.2d 352 UNITED STATES, Petitioner v. John H. WILLIAMS, Jr. No. 90-1972. Argued Jan. 22, 1992. Decided May 4, 1992, the original intent of the grand jury established by the Magna Carta is upheld by the United States
Supreme Court in the opinion: "This Court's
736:
I have to agree a lot of the
Criticism seems to not have a neutral point of view with the primary source being a very anti grand jury/ anti F.B.I group which I feel is not a very reliable source since the big goal of this group is a petition to remove the grand jury concept form the United stats
721:
I'm boldly removing it. It's not actually about the topic of the article. It should be at the other end of that libertarian dude's redlink in the lede. It is clearly POV-pushing in this article. It is not as if this is a "pro-Grand juries" article in need of balance, it is an article about Grand
423:
I think especially given the high interest of grand juries due to the "CIA leak case," it would be valuable to include in this article who the members of a grand jury are, how they are selected, and what responsibilities and expectations are on them (for example, petit juries can be sequestered,
792:
Also one of the main cited source number 22. I feel is a
Questionable source. The group is very Politically against Grand Jury as well as the F.B.I and their article on the Grand Jury concept is a scathing article about how the Grand Jury is a tool of the F.B.I to oppress people which isn't the
306:
I think the article answered the question as best it could. Every state has different rules concerning the selection of members, how many sit on it, or what kind of cases they are allowed to hear. I think the problem is the word, "jury". In old England, after Cromwell reorganized the justice
464:
I added an important fact(something that actually exists) concerning decisions of a grand jury and this was edited out. I am new but even provided a foot note with source. If this article is to be factual and truthful then why would someone, arbitrarily and capriciously, edit out important
514:
If I am wrong in my copyvio suspicions, then all the other objections above are actionable and the new version could in theory be fixed (rather than discarded). However, I believe that would take too much work to really be worthwhile; the old version was working fine and can do so again.
468:
I intend to undo, redo, or edit(as soon as I fiure out the correct or best choise), to correct this. There are THREE choises(I am still researching other sources and states) a grand jury can make and not TWO. I think all complete rewrites, without community support, should be undone.
679:
As the original author of the information on California I would point out that the primary point was that county level Grand Juries in California have a unique role of government oversight as opposed to just criminal indictment. --signed Glenn P. (sorry I don't have a user name)
285:
In contrast, Michael Jackson was recently accused of child molestation. I suppose because of the long investigation, his popularity, his recognizability, and lack of flight risk, the Santa Barbara DA decided to indict him, which is unusual but can happen in California.
35:
613:
The article is within the scope of WikiProject law. A grand jury has two choices by accepted standards. A true bill and a no true bill. In the state of Louisiana there is a 3rd choice. By "nuking" local sections the article would not be accurate.
920:
garnered after the fact is insufficient for justifying an arrest. Does this factor of timing apply to a grand jury's considerations, or is it okay for a grand jury to issue an indictment based upon information that the prosecutor didn't have?
1136:
and many other sources. Grand juries were not invented in the USA. They were invented in England, they were of great importance in the British Empire for hundreds of years, and recentism is not a reason to Americanize this article. The article
1110:
2) Should we merge Grand juries in the United States into this article? It seems to be one of the only countries with grand juries still and is now quite lightweight and might fit better over here (especially after this article is cleaned-up)
653:
I think this page needs collaboration to refine the contents. It is hard to define, if local information is excluded, what can stay and what may not. I would personally like to know if any other jurisdictions have more than two choices.
756:
March 24th, 2011 user 166.127.1.215 has placed three instances of obscenities in the article. I removed these. I am an inexperienced user and I don't know how to report this, so I thought I'd put a notification here for a possible ban.
1021:
Unless I'm very mistaken, this article gives no indication who has the authority to convene a grand jury, nor anything about its membership other than that the people are citizens. E.g. are you subpoena'd to become a member? Is there a
337:
and balances (which have been pillaged and destroyed by attorneys) to protect the constitution, then the grand jury is the people's check and balance on government to protect their freedom. Not under any attorney's or judge's thumb.
452:
Is there a general sequence of events with a grand jury? I'm trying to follow the Valerie Plame leak investigation and was wondering if there are milestones to watch for? How does a grand jury inestigation start? When does it end?
657:
I ran across the third choice(in Louisiana) by accident. Records that I find show the choice has been exercised only two times. This is certainly unique as it is proof that there are, in some jurisdictions, more than two choices.
1220:
793:
purpose of a grand Jury at all nor has it ever been in the United states. Also it doesn't reflect the Grand Jury Concept as a whole. It has no Neutral point or any real information and is filled with a lot of opinions. --
1174:
of primary sources from the other article (and considering removing some from here pending this discussion) because it wasn't clear they were notable enough and seemed like excessive detail and original research.
688:
The entry does a fairly good job of noting the unconstitutionality of the Grand Jury however there was no real details about how such a violation of law is obsolete given the extant legal due process in the US.
1210:
632:
Louisiana should definitely stay but the two sections "Circuit Grand Juries in Kentucky" and "County grand juries in California, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Nevada" don't seem to add anything unique.
396:
that are convened for one specific investigation which sit until the investigation is completed. There are also investigative grand juries formed which sit for a year or so, but meet only once a week.
1225:
1046:
members might be known to be friendly or hostile to the state, the plaintiff, the defendant, etc? Can Grand jury members later speak, write or otherwise convey their jury experience with the public?
789:
Today the Criticism section was added into this and I have a huge issue with how it is written which appears to have a strong POV against the grand jury. When it should be neutral on the subject.
433:
I note that news reports of the grand jury examining the Michael Brown killing in Ferguson say the jury consisted of only 12 members, not the 16 to 23 mentionied in the Knowledge (XXG) article.
1152:
account that was largely inactive from creation in 2016 to the end of 2022. And I do not support the systematic removal of relevant accurate verifiable content from this article either.
1104:
1) Removing troves of unsourced or under-sourced material (most of the article text) in a few days if proper citations to secondary sources are still missing. I did something similar on
282:. OJ was accused of murder, but he ran. After the infamous chase, he was arrested. The following Monday he was brought to an arraignment, and soon after to a preliminary hearing.
870:
court, and no procedures, personnel or institutions outside the court system. We cannot but be suspicious of technical concepts that do not have common sense explanations.
384:
Also, how many people make up a grand jury? And typically, how long do they sit for? Just for one case? or for a specified period of time unless needed for longer?
1205:
507:
likewise, the new revision was often unencyclopedic in tone, and occasionally crossed the line to start to give the author's personal view of grand juries.
901:
to the proceedings, should the grand jury issue an indictment? Also, has the answer to this question evolved over time and/or does it vary by geography?
510:
while considerably longer than the previous (and now present) version, the new version didn't contain much more information. It was thus harder to read.
889:
Would someone in the know please clarify this in the article? Is a grand jury supposed to evaluate only a claimant's assertion that probable cause has
1215:
147:
1235:
137:
650:==You are right. I read those parts again and there is information that is probably more general than necessary while certainly not unique.
1002:
977:
921:
723:
1143:
1130:
1061:
905:
1240:
1138:
1132:
1105:
319:
1134:
705:
1200:
1090:
1077:
44:
959:
590:
which indicates that all states have provisions for grand juries. Whether the states use them in practice is not indicated.
1230:
773:
598:
The local sections should be nuked. This is an overview article. The specific jurisdiction sections are way too local.
995:
I was hoping to learn what nations besides the U.S. still use the Grand Jury. Could this information be added, please?
108:
69:
976:
appeared in the New York Times, and numerous others in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, visible at the stltoday.com site.
1086:
586:
The information regarding the number of states using Grand Juries doesn't match the dayton school of law info. See
1076:
Could anyone unpack this? As I read it (from Europe), a Grand Jury in the US essentially has the same role as a
1006:
50:
981:
1057:
925:
727:
547:
Previously I wrote a comment on "Jury nullification" discussion page. Here's some material on "Grand Jury":
234:
195:
112:, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
1049:
998:
947:
761:
693:
315:
909:
638:
603:
955:
798:
742:
489:
323:
1053:
662:
between other states concerning lawyers which can complicate things like the "choice of law" article.
1179:
1116:
1081:
737:
constitution. I would feel ok with the information if it could be provided by a more neutral source.
701:
492:
completely rewrote this page. I have reverted it back to its old version, for the following reasons:
438:
434:
1149:
181:
21:
951:
856:
809:
are not at all of that order. Sources should also be cited from the original, wherever possible. --
794:
738:
504:
in particular, he/she made no attempt to work collaboratively with the article as already in place.
260:
242:
941:
871:
765:
1157:
1129:. Grand juries in the USA satisfy GNG and are indepedently notable of grand juries generally, eg
860:
837:
578:
268:
290:
875:
814:
769:
634:
599:
241:
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
1032:
670:
619:
478:
425:
345:
221:
893:
been established? That is, if the grand jury finds that probable cause becomes established
825:
1175:
1112:
697:
520:
279:
587:
897:
the grand jury proceedings but also finds that the claimant did not have probable cause
885:
Verifying that probable cause has already been established vs. garnering probable cause
533:
If there's going to be a criticism of section, there needs to be a support of section.
1194:
1167:
1153:
1085:
in the accusation, only that it is credible and not frivolous. What have I missed? --
833:
571:
534:
368:
1146:
810:
397:
275:
188:. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see
84:
63:
1027:
composed of male land-owners and eventually that was widened, but in what era? -
971:
No, the minimum size of a grand jury in the USA is not 16, it is 12 ... or lower?
940:
ABA Grand Jury FAQ is a dead link. Exists in External Links and References (18).
1028:
666:
615:
474:
339:
94:
1170:, I am more than happy to keep them separate - was simply posing the question.
832:, and added another reference, which I hope you will find more acceptable. --
516:
264:
256:
185:
100:
90:
556:
551:
828:. In agreement with Wikiain, I have removed "source number 22", I have
566:
229:
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
561:
1221:
Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences
1183:
1161:
1120:
1094:
1065:
1035:
1010:
985:
963:
929:
913:
879:
864:
841:
818:
802:
777:
746:
731:
709:
674:
642:
623:
607:
581:
537:
523:
482:
442:
428:
371:
353:
327:
1148:
on grand jury charging in US law. The account that did this is a
665:
I forgot to sign the above but my section was edited out anyway.
1142:
original research. Indeed, it is quoted by periodical articles
942:
http://www.abanow.org/2010/03/faqs-about-the-grand-jury-system/
302:
area would be helpful. (Melewen 23:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC))
203:
163:
113:
15:
1211:
Knowledge (XXG) vital articles in Society and social sciences
829:
190:
176:
1041:
Who sits on a Grand Jury? How are the members chosen?
588:
http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/stategj/stateg.htm
1226:
C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
252:
Systems with both grand jury and preliminary hearings
572:http://www.udayton.edu/~grandjur/recent/lawrev.htm
297:How is a grand jury different from a regular jury?
271:, or those without an immediate flight risk).
233:] The anchor (#Code of criminal instruction)
8:
274:As an example using famous people, consider
194:; for the discussion at that location, see
1047:
996:
722:juries, and this section is out of place.
543:Grand Jury: origin, history, purpose, etc.
58:
501:well the author understands the wikipedia
60:
19:
1206:Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles
1080:in common law jurisdictions and as an
991:Countries that still use Grand Juries?
557:http://www.rangeguide.net/gjhistry.htm
552:http://www.rangeguide.net/ballard.htm
7:
567:http://www.rangeguide.net/gjmemo.htm
106:This article is within the scope of
1072:"If they find the accusation true,"
562:http://www.rangeguide.net/rules.htm
116:and the subjects encompassed by it.
49:It is of interest to the following
1106:Grand juries in the United States.
1100:May 2024 Cleanup + Merger proposal
14:
1139:Grand juries in the United States
785:Criticism section and source 22
259:is a jurisdiction that has both
207:
167:
93:
83:
62:
29:
20:
1078:Director of Public Prosecutions
142:This article has been rated as
122:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Law
1216:C-Class level-5 vital articles
880:10:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
830:restored the Criticism section
594:Local sections should be nuked
1:
732:02:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
643:13:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
624:13:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
443:07:13, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
328:15:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
1236:High-importance law articles
1066:20:38, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
1011:21:23, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
608:03:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
524:21:01, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
429:16:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
354:19:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
986:03:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
964:22:31, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
1257:
1036:14:44, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
778:18:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
752:Vandalism by 166.127.1.215
538:20:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
372:20:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
307:system, it was called the
148:project's importance scale
930:15:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
582:14:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
529:Support of Section needed
293:05:01, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
141:
78:
57:
1241:WikiProject Law articles
1184:03:31, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
1162:02:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
1121:01:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
1095:13:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
914:13:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
865:00:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
842:11:02, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
819:23:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
803:20:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
747:19:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
710:19:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
400:July 7, 2005 13:28 (UTC)
125:Template:WikiProject Law
675:16:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
483:16:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
1201:C-Class vital articles
448:Procedure and timeline
269:white-collar criminals
497:encyclopedia article.
362:Jurisdiction specific
174:The contents of the
43:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
36:level-5 vital article
1231:C-Class law articles
1082:examining magistrate
261:preliminary hearings
850:The first paragraph
684:Obsolete repression
490:User:71.64.134.131
177:Special grand jury
45:content assessment
1068:
1052:comment added by
1013:
1001:comment added by
967:
950:comment added by
781:
764:comment added by
717:Criticism Section
713:
696:comment added by
318:comment added by
249:
248:
224:in most browsers.
202:
201:
162:
161:
158:
157:
154:
153:
1248:
966:
944:
780:
758:
712:
690:
352:
350:
330:
309:Grand Inqisition
243:Reporting errors
235:has been deleted
211:
210:
204:
193:
171:
170:
164:
130:
129:
126:
123:
120:
103:
98:
97:
87:
80:
79:
74:
66:
59:
42:
33:
32:
25:
24:
16:
1256:
1255:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1191:
1190:
1102:
1074:
1043:
1019:
993:
973:
945:
938:
887:
852:
787:
759:
754:
719:
691:
686:
596:
545:
531:
462:
450:
379:
364:
346:
338:
313:
299:
280:Michael Jackson
254:
245:
227:
226:
225:
208:
189:
168:
144:High-importance
127:
124:
121:
118:
117:
109:WikiProject Law
99:
92:
73:High‑importance
72:
40:
30:
12:
11:
5:
1254:
1252:
1244:
1243:
1238:
1233:
1228:
1223:
1218:
1213:
1208:
1203:
1193:
1192:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1171:
1145:and treatises
1101:
1098:
1073:
1070:
1042:
1039:
1018:
1015:
1003:174.21.156.137
992:
989:
972:
969:
937:
934:
933:
932:
886:
883:
851:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
786:
783:
753:
750:
718:
715:
685:
682:
648:
647:
646:
645:
627:
626:
595:
592:
575:
574:
569:
564:
559:
554:
544:
541:
530:
527:
512:
511:
508:
505:
502:
498:
487:
465:information.
461:
458:
456:
449:
446:
422:
420:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
388:
387:
386:
385:
378:
375:
363:
360:
359:
358:
357:
356:
298:
295:
253:
250:
247:
246:
240:
239:
238:
222:case-sensitive
216:
215:
214:
212:
200:
199:
172:
160:
159:
156:
155:
152:
151:
140:
134:
133:
131:
105:
104:
88:
76:
75:
67:
55:
54:
48:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1253:
1242:
1239:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1217:
1214:
1212:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1202:
1199:
1198:
1196:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1172:
1169:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1144:
1140:
1135:
1133:
1131:
1128:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1108:
1107:
1099:
1097:
1096:
1092:
1088:
1083:
1079:
1071:
1069:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1040:
1038:
1037:
1034:
1030:
1025:
1016:
1014:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1000:
990:
988:
987:
983:
979:
978:72.251.70.112
970:
968:
965:
961:
957:
953:
949:
943:
935:
931:
927:
923:
922:66.194.253.20
918:
917:
916:
915:
911:
907:
902:
900:
896:
892:
884:
882:
881:
877:
873:
867:
866:
862:
858:
849:
843:
839:
835:
831:
827:
822:
821:
820:
816:
812:
807:
806:
805:
804:
800:
796:
790:
784:
782:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
751:
749:
748:
744:
740:
734:
733:
729:
725:
724:76.210.75.165
716:
714:
711:
707:
703:
699:
695:
683:
681:
677:
676:
672:
668:
663:
659:
655:
651:
644:
640:
636:
631:
630:
629:
628:
625:
621:
617:
612:
611:
610:
609:
605:
601:
593:
591:
589:
584:
583:
580:
573:
570:
568:
565:
563:
560:
558:
555:
553:
550:
549:
548:
542:
540:
539:
536:
528:
526:
525:
522:
518:
509:
506:
503:
499:
495:
494:
493:
491:
485:
484:
480:
476:
470:
466:
459:
457:
454:
447:
445:
444:
440:
436:
431:
430:
427:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
399:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
383:
382:
381:
380:
376:
374:
373:
370:
361:
355:
351:
349:
344:
342:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
329:
325:
321:
317:
312:
310:
303:
296:
294:
292:
287:
283:
281:
277:
272:
270:
266:
262:
258:
251:
244:
236:
232:
231:
230:
223:
219:
213:
206:
205:
197:
196:its talk page
192:
187:
183:
179:
178:
173:
166:
165:
149:
145:
139:
136:
135:
132:
115:
111:
110:
102:
96:
91:
89:
86:
82:
81:
77:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
37:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1126:
1109:
1103:
1075:
1054:198.2.94.117
1048:— Preceding
1044:
1023:
1020:
997:— Preceding
994:
974:
946:— Preceding
939:
906:192.35.44.24
903:
898:
894:
890:
888:
868:
853:
791:
788:
760:— Preceding
755:
735:
720:
687:
678:
664:
660:
656:
652:
649:
635:Americasroof
600:Americasroof
597:
585:
576:
546:
532:
513:
486:
471:
467:
463:
455:
451:
432:
421:
365:
347:
340:
308:
305:
304:
300:
288:
284:
276:O.J. Simpson
273:
265:grand juries
255:
228:
220:Anchors are
217:
175:
143:
128:law articles
107:
51:WikiProjects
34:
1017:Formed how?
692:—Preceding
426:DJProFusion
320:24.93.32.58
314:—Preceding
191:its history
114:legal field
1195:Categories
1176:Superb Owl
1150:WP:SLEEPER
1113:Superb Owl
857:Jim Bowery
698:Damotclese
435:Marchino61
367:the day.
257:California
186:Grand jury
180:page were
101:Law portal
1024:voir dire
936:Dead Link
824:aware of
488:Recently
460:reversion
348:sui juris
39:is rated
1168:James500
1154:James500
1062:contribs
1050:unsigned
999:unsigned
960:contribs
952:Hernauld
948:unsigned
834:Astellix
795:Andaries
774:contribs
762:unsigned
739:Andaries
706:contribs
694:unsigned
535:Joncnunn
369:Joncnunn
316:unsigned
904:Thanks
891:already
872:Aboctok
811:Wikiain
766:Mabbass
424:etc.).
398:Tufflaw
146:on the
41:C-class
1127:Oppose
1087:𝕁𝕄𝔽
1029:Jmabel
895:during
826:WP:SPA
667:Otr500
616:Otr500
579:SPavel
475:Otr500
341:Suijur
182:merged
47:scale.
899:prior
517:Doops
291:Myria
184:into
28:This
1180:talk
1158:talk
1117:talk
1091:talk
1058:talk
1033:Talk
1007:talk
982:talk
956:talk
926:talk
910:talk
876:talk
861:talk
838:talk
815:talk
799:talk
770:talk
743:talk
728:talk
702:talk
671:talk
639:talk
620:talk
604:talk
521:talk
479:talk
439:talk
324:talk
278:and
263:and
218:Tip:
138:High
289:--
119:Law
70:Law
1197::
1182:)
1160:)
1119:)
1093:)
1064:)
1060:•
1031:|
1009:)
984:)
962:)
958:•
928:)
912:)
878:)
863:)
840:)
817:)
801:)
776:)
772:•
745:)
730:)
708:)
704:•
673:)
641:)
622:)
606:)
577:--
519:|
481:)
441:)
326:)
1178:(
1166:@
1156:(
1115:(
1089:(
1056:(
1005:(
980:(
954:(
924:(
908:(
874:(
859:(
836:(
813:(
797:(
768:(
741:(
726:(
700:(
669:(
637:(
618:(
602:(
477:(
437:(
377:=
343:,
322:(
237:.
198:.
150:.
53::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
