I have been selected to serve on a grand jury. We don't decide guilt or innocence as would a petit jury, we determine whether or not there will be a trial in the first place. The purpose is to limit the power of the govt to arrest people without probable cause. I assume that the prosecutors know what a grand jury will pass and what it won't pass and won't innundate us with poorly investigated cases. My problem is that there are certain crimes that I don't think should even be crimes and which apparently are a large percentage of what we are going to pass judgement on. I am only supposed to determine if the law was broken. I am not supposed to judge whether the law itself is good. What would you do if you thought that the law had indeed been broken, that the evidence against the defendant was sufficient, but that the law was a bad one? After all, you have a duty to the law and the state (county in my case), but also to the community.