As Portland watches, the Grand Jury looking into police conduct relating to the death of James Chasse will last until at least next week.

Which may be normal and may not be. Certainly grand juries are often continued due to witness unavailability, which is the reason cited for the wait here.

Of course, most grand juries aren’t looking into the conduct (or misconduct) of Portland’s finest to determine what, if any, criminal charges should be levelled against officers responsible for a man’s death.

Pursuant to Oregon law, prosecutors can issue subpoenaes enforceable by the threat of jail if a witness does not appear. While normally prosecutors may be wary of issuing those subpoenaes, I would suggest that cases like these are prime examples of when they should be used. The public is waiting, after all, and this high-profile case will not go well, whether the grand jury indicts the officers involved or finds them not to be criminally culpable for the actions which resulted in the injuries cited on our site earlier.

Looking ahead, I predict two things.

First, I’d guess none of the officers will be charged. Although the evidence may appear convincing when presented by the press, citing witnesses with various biases, the fact is that a grand jury needs to find that a jury could find the officers guilty of some form of homicide beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence presented.

And, as is typical in most police cases, the grand jury will get to hear the officers’ points of view, as well as that of the witnesses. And that combination of direct access and multiple mitigation messages from the various officers involved will muddy the waters enough that the grand jury will have no choice than to cut the cops loose.

Second, get the cameras ready. This case is ripe for a replay of the inquest scenario played out in the James Perez case. Certainly a result that the Portland Police, and Mike Schrunk, never wanted to have to face again…