The Grand Jury Decisions

The Grand Jury Decisions

  3:49 AM    Unknown

---

Photo: Vehicles from several television stations are parked outside the Irwin County Courthouse Wednesday, April 12, the day a Grand Jury indicted Ryan Duke in Ocilla, Georgia.

The Grand Jury Decisions

By now, most of you know that Ryan Alexander Duke was indicted by an Irwin County Grand Jury on all the charges levied against him in the Tara Grinstead murder case. The grand jurors voted for true bills on all six counts, which means they found probable cause to move forward with the indictments.

I was personally surprised and confused at first that two additional charges were added, as he was indicted on six charges rather than the four charges that were announced at his first court appearance on February 23. I've since learned a bit more about the two additional charges.

In February, Ryan was charged with murder, burglary, aggravated assault and concealing the death of another. In Georgia, there are primarily two types of murder charges, malice murder and felony murder. The original murder charge was felony murder, although it was not specifically indicated in the warrants issued for Ryan's arrest in February.

Wednesday, April 12, he was indicted on two counts of felony murder and one count of malice murder, so an additional felony murder charge and one count of malice murder were added.

Confused yet?

Let me explain how he can be charged with murder three times, when he is only actually accused of killing one person, Tara Grinstead. I'm not a lawyer of course, but I've covered enough court to have a decent grasp of these charges.

Malice murder includes what other states call premeditated murder, but it can also include other acts that cause deaths in which the purpose of the act was to kill or do harm. Malice murder is a crime when someone intentionally kills someone with malice aforethought. This is probably what most people think of when they think of the word "murder."

By charging Ryan Duke with malice murder, the prosecutors are saying he intended to kill Tara with malice aforethought, although the crime may not have been planned far in advance.

Felony murder is much different. Felony murder is a charge which is applied when someone dies, even unintentionally, during the commission of a felony. If a person dies during the commission of multiple felonies, someone can be charged with multiple counts of felony murder, even though only one death occurred. Defendants can and often are charged with both felony murder and malice murder, too, even when there was only one death.

Felony murder allows for charges to stem from a death that happens because of the commission a felony. If you fatally shoot someone, that might be both malice murder and felony murder because someone died during the commission of aggravated assault. If you fatally run over someone while trying to escape a robbery, that might be felony murder. Even if one of your fellow burglars is shot and killed by a homeowner during a burglary, you might be charged with felony murder.

Ryan Duke is alleged to have committed felony murder when he allegedly caused Tara's death while committing aggravated assault. He is also alleged to have committed felony murder when he allegedly caused Tara's death while committing burglary. The latter was the original felony murder charge that was levied against Ryan in February.

The two new charges, malice murder and the felony murder charge stemming from the alleged aggravated assault, were added as special presentments which were presented before the Grand Jury. Rather than being formally charged through arrest warrants, the Grand Jury was presented evidence or testimony by the prosecution during the closed Grand Jury session.

One of the important differences, from what I've read, with presentments is that they avoid the preliminary hearing in when the accused can question or confront law enforcement officers and other witnesses. Of course, Ryan Duke waived his right to a preliminary hearing, so no preliminary hearing was held anyway.

It may be that investigators determined they had enough evidence to support the two additional charges and rather than formally charging Ryan, they simply brought the evidence to the Grand Jury instead.

On Wednesday, April 12, a bench warrant was issued to arrest Ryan Duke on the two additional special presentment charges, malice murder and felony murder. Since he was already arrested and incarcerated, this seems like it was only a formality.

All three murder charges have a maximum penalty of death, but they can also result in either life in prison without the possibility of parole, or life in prison with the possibility of parole. According to attorney Philip Holloway on the Up and Vanished podcast April 13, if Ryan was found guilty of all charges, all of the charges but concealing a death would likely be absorbed by the malice murder charge. In that instance, he could face one of the three murder penalties plus up to 10 years for the concealing a death charge.

An additional revelation from the indictments was a major change to the burglary charge against Ryan Duke. When he was arrested in February, the arrest warrant stated that Ryan entered Tara's home in Ocilla unlawfully to commit the felonies of aggravated assault and murder. In Georgia, a burglary charge does not necessarily mean that someone illegally entered a place to commit theft. It can stem from an intention to commit any felony.

However, the burglary indictment against Ryan does not mention intentions of aggravated assault or murder. Instead, the burglary indictment states he entered Tara's home with the intent to commit theft. This suggests that the murder may have been a "burglary gone wrong" but also raises questions. It is curious that the prosecution changed its mind about the reason Ryan Duke allegedly entered that home.

I have been asked what Ryan could have stolen. Well, as Philip Holloway pointed out on Up and Vanished, the burglary charge does not require theft, only the intention of theft. But several items were reportedly missing from Tara's home, such as her purse, her keys, and some jewelry, although she may have been wearing the jewelry.

The aggravated assault indictment indicates that Ryan allegedly harmed her with his hands, as did the arrest warrant for the charge. No new details were revealed, and the indictment is vague about how hands were allegedly used to harm her.

The concealing a death charge also did not reveal anything new. Ryan is alleged to have removed Tara's body from her home in Ocilla. Some have questioned why he was not also charged in Ben Hill County, since that is where her body is alleged to have been moved to. My guess is that since the act of concealing a death would be considered a single act, it would only be charged in one county, probably where the act began, even though more than one county may have been involved. Perhaps an attorney who reads this can clarify.

The next step in the legal process is for Ryan to enter a plea. His arraignment is scheduled for May 4, which is when a plea is usually entered. Ryan could enter the plea in person, or his attorney could enter a waiver of arraignment and a not guilty plea without him present, which would allow Ryan to avoid being again captured on camera in a green striped detention center uniform.

Of course, he could enter a guilty plea if he wishes, and I believe he could do that even before May 4 if he so chooses and the court provides him the opportunity.

I have also been asked about the Grand Jury status of Bo Dukes, who is charged with concealing a death, tampering with evidence and hindering the apprehension of a criminal in relation to the death of Tara Grinstead. Note that since Bo's charges are in another county, his charges will be heard by a separate Grand Jury.

The Ben Hill County Clerk of Court office told me that the Ben Hill County Grand Jury has not yet heard Bo's case, so he has not been indicted, if he will be at all. The next meeting of the Ben Hill Grand Jury is set for June 19.

The law is complex, and in the situation where someone can be charged with murder multiple times for only one death, it doesn't make a lot of sense. I could be wrong about some of the nuances of what I said above, but I believe it's pretty close to correct. If you're an attorney, let me know where I've erred and I'll correct it.

Was I On the Grand Jury?

So, was I on the Grand Jury that decided to indict Ryan Duke this week?

No.

Well, more correctly I did not participate in hearing and judging Ryan's case. I don't know if "recused myself" is the correct term, so I'll just say I voluntarily excused myself from that particular case.

It was one of the toughest decisions I've ever made in my life, but I think it was the right one.

For those who might not know, I was selected for the Irwin County Grand Jury for the first time in February, not knowing that just a few weeks later Ryan Duke would be arrested in a case that was incredibly important to me for more than a quarter of my life. Even as I sat stunned in that courtroom on February 23, realizing "I'm on this Grand Jury of all Grand Juries," I didn't know that covering this story would basically take over my life, but it has.

A friend advised me to keep quiet about serving on the Grand Jury because the prosecution would probably strike me from it, so I didn't talk about it a lot. Some folks knew, including even Payne Lindsey of Up and Vanished. I didn't really make it a secret, but I just didn't advertise it.

I was worried that I would be struck from the Grand Jury, and I wanted to serve, but as the date approached, other worries crept in. I worried that serving on the Grand Jury and keeping what happens in the jury room secret, as I swore an oath to do, would make my job extremely difficult. When the arrest was announced, I was just a small-town journalist covering a news story. Two months later, I'm still a small-town journalist covering a news story, but I'm also a surprisingly well read blogger whose posts are mostly devoted to the Tara Grinstead case, a semi-regular guest on one of the most popular podcasts in the nation, and an aspiring author writing a true crime book about the case.

I'm also in a very real way investigating the case and trying to reveal the truth about what actually happened in October 2005. Some of you would say to leave it to the professionals, but when you have people coming to you with information and tips, when people for some reason look to you for answers, and when you care as much about finding this particular truth as I do, you don't really have any choice.

For all of those various hats I'm now wearing, from journalist to investigator, serving on that Grand Jury for Tara's case would make my jobs very difficult. In everything I wrote, in every online discussion or struck up conversation, I would have to avoid my knowledge from the Grand Jury like a landmine. If I learned something independently of the Grand Jury, I could use it for whatever purpose I wanted, but if someone accused me of using my Grand Jury knowledge, I might have to reveal my true source or else face prosecution. Then again, some might accuse me of using my Grand Jury knowledge to ask the right questions or avoid the wrong answers.

I've made it clear that I have doubts that Tara was killed in her home, as the Georgia Bureau of Investigation alleges. If I suddenly changed my tune and stopped questioning whether she was killed in her home, people would be able to guess that I had knowledge that made me believe she was killed there. I might not, in that situation, be intentionally revealing information from the Grand Jury room, but in essence, I would be.

Of course, the fact that the Grand Jury did choose to indict Ryan Duke gives me more confidence in the GBI's allegations, although I still hold onto my doubts and questions. I stated this after the Grand Jury's indictment, and I quickly realized, if I had served on the Grand Jury, I would not have even been able to say that. People would have interpreted that as me revealing what should be secret information.

But I do want to take an aside to say a few things.

Some people seemed to take my last blog post, "If I Was On the Grand Jury," as if I was saying I did not think Ryan Duke was guilty. That is not what I was saying at all. Although at times I have leaned one way or another, I do not currently have any idea whether Ryan Duke killed Tara Grinstead. I am not sure she was murdered at all. I don't know how more impartial you can get than that, had I served on the Grand Jury.

In my years as a journalist, I have sometimes lamented the fact that we usually only present one side of a crime story, at least until the trial. We usually only present the prosecution's side. Whether it's a drunk driving charge or malice murder, we inadvertently support the allegations against the accused by listing the charges against them without any counter-argument. We are careful to put "alleged" or "accused of" to try to seem like we are not accusing people of the crimes they are charged with, but then we present the narrative law enforcement presents, which makes them seem like criminals.

Now, I understand why it's like that. Especially with a small town newspaper you do not have the time or resources to examine every case thoroughly or to learn about every side. And frankly, most of the time, law enforcement's story is right.

But we live in the world of OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony. We live in the world where someone accused of destroying a person's body gets a cheaper bond than someone who possesses an illegal drug for their own personal use. We live in a world where law enforcement can be given a tip about Ryan Duke in 2005 and not make an arrest until 2017.

The legal system, and all its components, can and does make mistakes, and it's my job, in all my hats, to question that system and to make sure it is doing its job correctly. And in this case, if no others, I have decided to dedicate the resources to show all sides.

So I won't feel guilty for presenting information that questions the official story or that might make someone question Ryan Duke's role in Tara's death. The truth is not one-sided, and truth-tellers should not be either.

We ought to tell all sides in all cases; we just simply can't. But I can do my best to do that in this one.

So back to why I excused myself from the Grand Jury...

Monday, I called to ask District Attorney Paul Bowden if Ryan Duke's case would be presented to the Grand Jury Wednesday. He said he would not normally tell the media, but he didn't know how to react since I was also a grand juror. I didn't want to abuse my position, so I told the truth, that I was calling as the media, and I accepted his response, which was no comment.

But it made me think even more about my conflicted role. Bowden's response told me that I wasn't surely going to be struck from the Grand Jury, although it might have still been a possibility.

Tuesday, I tried to sleep and my various worries were weighing on my mind. I started realizing that even if I wasn't struck from the Grand Jury, I might want to ask to be off of it, if that was even possible.

It bothered me that I had such pointed questions that might not be asked if I was off the jury, particularly about whether Tara was killed in her home in Ocilla. If she wasn't killed there, it would mean Ryan Duke might should be charged in another county or might not should be charged at all. I wrote "If I Was On the Grand Jury" primarily to introduce those questions to other members of the Grand Jury, in the hopes they might ask them in my absence.

But I should say that even if the prosecution only has the evidence I have reason to believe they do have, I probably would have voted for a true bill. That possible evidence is a link to the latex glove found in Tara's yard, the testimony of Bo Dukes and a confession by Ryan Duke. Although the glove might have been dropped after driving Tara's car back to her home, although I would not necessarily believe the testimony of a convicted thief like Bo Dukes, and although I think it is possible Ryan Duke is taking a fall since he may have serious health problems and may need the free health care he gets in jail, a Grand Jury does not need the stringent proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a trial jury needs. A Grand Jury only needs to believe probable cause exists to believe the defendant is guilty.

So, then, Tuesday afternoon, I got a message to call Judge Bill Reinhardt, the chief superior court judge of the Tifton Judicial Circuit. First off, I should say that although I don't know the man well, I've always been impressed with Judge Reinhardt in all my dealings with him. I find him to be friendly, thorough and fair-minded. I think he's a good guy and a good judge.

I called him, and we only talked briefly. He said he wanted to put something in my ear, which if you're not familiar with that phrase, means he wanted to inform me of something I might not be thinking about. He said I had done nothing wrong; he just wanted to talk to me. We agreed to meet at 9 a.m. in his chambers on Wednesday, about 30 minutes before the Grand Jury convened.

Honestly, I looked forward to talking to him, because I hoped he might give me some advice on how to handle my strange, difficult situation. I guessed that he planned to encourage me to step off the Grand Jury, but I was actually wrong about that.

After exchanging pleasantries, we talked about the subject. Bowden had sent him a copy of "If I Was On the Grand Jury," and from what the judge read, he thought I wanted off the Grand Jury. I told him I wasn't sure. I had conflicted feelings.

I'll be honest, the part of me that has wanted to know what happened to Tara Grinstead since October 25, 2005 really wanted me in that jury room, hearing that evidence. But that was a purely selfish reason.

More altruistically, I wanted to serve on the jury because I felt like it was my duty, because I thought I would make a good juror who could use his knowledge about the case to ask some questions I believe need to be asked. He even said the questions I had were good questions. He said that selfishly, he wanted me on the jury because I was intelligent, wanted to serve and cared about my community.

Some of you may be saying, "But Dusty knows too much to serve in this case," well that probably doesn't matter. An attorney friend shared with me that according to Georgia law "a person is not disqualified or incompetent to serve as a grand juror by reason of bias or prejudice on his part, by the fact that he has heard or read about the case under investigation or has even formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt of the accused." And I doubt anyone in the jury room was not well informed of at least the basics of Ryan Duke's case.

I got the impression that the prosecution might ask the judge to strike me from the Grand Jury though, but based on his demeanor, I don't think Judge Reinhardt would have struck me, probably due to the case law I quoted above. There's no way to know because it never got that far, but I wondered then what conspiracy theories people might proclaim if the court did strike me from the jury. I didn't want to be the cause of that sort of chaos.

I was leaning toward asking off the jury, but there was a reason that would have pushed me to stay on it. I asked Judge Reinhardt if what happens in the Grand Jury room is secret until the end of the trial or secret forever. If one day I could have reported on what happened in that jury room, it would have been worth the pitfalls it would create for me as a writer.

"Forever," the judge said, and within moments, my mind was made up. I would excuse myself for Ryan Duke's case but continue to serve for the other cases.

Judge Reinhardt never seemed to intentionally encourage me one way or the other, but he inadvertently did push me one way with something he said. He said that while serving on the Grand Jury is an important duty, my duty informing the public as a journalist might be even more important.

Maybe so. I don't know. I'm proud to be able to do both, even in a limited capacity.