A Grand Jury is appointed for one reason. That reason is to decide if there is enough evidence provided for an indictment. In the case of a former grand juror who claims to have been misled during the proceedings, a single opinion, and not that of the jury as a whole.
This effort, on behalf of the juror, by the ACLU should be denied before a Federal Judge.
The grand jury’s ruling did in fact abide by the evidence and instructions received during the proceedings. The law states that grand jurors must remain silent about the evidence, or lack there of, in the proceedings. This prevented the rebuttal of the remaining grand jury members who adhere to the law.
This juror claims that Juror # 40 had sympathy for Officer Darren Wilson, and that the prosecutor withheld evidence in the case. Most jurors have sympathy for the victim in cases of violent crimes and perhaps juror #40 saw Officer Darren Wilson as the victim in this case since evidence presented proved he had been attacked in his patrol car.
If the grand juror silence law is not enforced, then each high profile case will entice other jurors to seek publicity, many with false claims against Grand Jury members. the judge, or the presenting prosecutor of the proceedings.