Bernhard Goetz - Grand Juries

Grand Juries

Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau asked a grand jury to indict Goetz on four counts of attempted murder, four of assault, four of reckless endangerment, and one of criminal possession of a weapon. Because they would have to be granted immunity from prosecution, neither Goetz nor the four men he shot were called to testify. The 23 jurors heard witnesses, considered the police report of the shooting, and studied transcripts and tapes of the sometimes conflicting statements Goetz made to police in New Hampshire. The jury refused to indict Goetz on the more serious charges, voting indictments only for unlawful gun possession – one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, for carrying in public the loaded unlicensed gun used in the subway shooting, and two counts of possession in the fourth degree, for keeping two other unlicensed handguns in his home. The case was assigned to Judge Stephen Crane.

The shootings initially drew wide support from a public fearful and frustrated with rising crime rates and the state of the criminal justice system. A month after the grand jury's decision, a report summarizing statements Goetz made to police became public, indicating he had fired one shot at each of the four men, then checked their condition, and seeing no blood on the fourth, said "You don't look so bad, here's another" and fired again. The media now wrote of a change in the public mood and demanded that Goetz be tried on the attempted murder and assault charges while suggesting approaches that would allow Morgenthau to convene a new grand jury. Public figures including New York Governor Mario Cuomo raised questions based on the police summary. Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania called for a special prosecutor. Stating that he had a new witness, Morgenthau obtained Judge Crane's authorization (transcript) to convene a second grand jury, which heard testimony by Canty and Ramseur and indicted Goetz on charges of attempted murder, assault, reckless endangerment and weapons possession.

Judge Crane granted a motion by Goetz to dismiss the new indictments, based on alleged errors in the prosecutor's instructions to the jury regarding Goetz's defense of justification for the use of deadly force. A second factor in the dismissal was the judge's opinion that testimony by Canty and Ramseur "strongly appeared" to have been perjury, based on later public statements by Canty and Ramseur that they had intended to rob Goetz, and on a newspaper interview where Cabey stated that the other members of the group planned to frighten and rob Goetz because he "looked like easy bait". The judge allowed the weapons possession and reckless endangerment charges to stand.

The New York Court of Appeals, in People v Goetz, reversed Judge Crane's dismissal, affirming the prosecutor's charge to the grand jury that a defendant's subjective belief that he is in imminent danger does not by itself justify the use of deadly force. The court agreed with the prosecutor that an objective belief, one that would be shared by a hypothetical reasonable person, is also required. The appeals court further held that Judge Crane's opinion that the testimony of Canty and Ramseur was perjurious was speculative and inappropriate. All charges were reinstated, and the case was sent to trial.