Justices keep grand jury testimony secret for now
A proposal to allow currently secret grand-jury transcripts to be released in limited cases — including fatal police shootings that result in no indictment — has been kicked down the road by the Ohio Supreme Court.
The court late last year sought public comment on the suggested amendment to court rules, but it then did not approve them by a May 1 deadline for submission to the legislature for its consideration.
A task force appointed by Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor recommended the change in 2016 to help foster public confidence in the grand jury system and decisions in the wake of controversial police shootings of blacks, including the death of 12-year-old Tamir Rice in Cleveland in 2014.
However, the proposal ran into a flood of opposition from prosecutors and police organizations. The court — without comment — returned it to the court’s rules commission for further consideration at its Dec. 19 meeting.
Nina Turner, a Democrat and former state senator from Cleveland, criticized the delay, saying the change in grand jury secrecy is vital to fostering greater accountability of police and prosecutors.
“If the delay is to figure out a way to make it work, that’s one thing. But don’t say you aren’t going to do anything to make the scales of justice more balanced, that’s unacceptable,” said Turner.
She served on a state task force created to find ways to improve police-community relations; it developed new statewide standards, including ones on the use of force by police and officer recruitment and hiring.
Franklin County’s Ron O’Brien was among the prosecutors objecting to the proposed change in comments submitted to the justices. The potential change to grand jury secrecy could endanger the safety and willingness of witnesses to testify and blemish the reputations of those who are falsely accused and not indicted, O’Brien wrote.
The Fraternal Order of Police also objected, with President Jay McDonald writing that the changes “attempt to solve problems that do not exist” while creating additional ones.
McDonald worried that the release of grand jury transcripts could prompt “media feeding frenzies,” observing: “These officers already survived one life-or-death fight on the street; they should not have to survive another fight in the media.”
The Ohio State Bar Association, which represents nearly two-thirds of the state’s lawyers, supported the “workable rule that will support the grand jury process while also allowing transparency where needed and appropriate” in high-profile cases of public interest.
Ohio Public Defender Tim Young also lobbied for the change. “The secrecy of grand jury proceedings in cases involving public officials has done incredible harm to public confidence in the grand jury system,” he wrote. “The investigation and prosecution of cases involving public official misconduct should be done with the knowledge that the public will be able to review the matter” and assess the performance of prosecutors.