Q--I have heard that "A grand jury can indict a ham sandwich if it wants to." Is this true?

A--Not at the federal level. At present, a ham sandwich can only be indicted in the states of Alabama, Alaska, and Hawaii. Since the precedent-setting case of Oscar-Meyer v. Meese, federal prosecution of ham sandwiches has become so difficult that it is rarely attempted. Prior to that case, ham sandwiches had been indicted on two occasions by federal grand juries. In one case the prosecution was dropped due to spoilage, and in the other (Baldwin v. Sweden) the ham sandwich was ruled to be acting in the capacity of a foreign ambassador, and was thus protected by diplomatic immunity.

Q--How is a special investigator chosen?

A--Through a complicated process of seniority, good-old-boy networks, and, occasionally, merit. In extremely important cases, the Senate Judiciary Committee will usually resort to several rounds of "One banana, two banana."

Q--Do partisan politics ever affect the grand jury process?

A--Of course not. Don't be silly.

Q--Does it matter if an indictment is handed down at the end of a grand jury's term? I thought a grand jury was a valid legal entity from the time it is empaneled until the time it expires.

A--You're making a common mistake. In fact, grand juries have a freshness peak that can affect the quality of their indictments. Those handed down early in a term are apt to be green and starchy, while any indictents issued in the last few days of a term tend to be soft and overripe. They are are likely to lead to poor results if prosecuted, and are suitable only for mashing and baking into some type of cake or quick bread. However, such products can be quite delicious, and are a wholesome and thrifty way to use up the leftovers of the legal process.