Can you please comment on what I did well and what I could have done differently in the following response I wrote? Here is the question I had to respond to: What is the 5th Amendment right to a grand jury? What is the grand jury provision of the 5th Amendment meant to protect? Why might the founding fathers include such a provision in the Bill of Rights? Does the grand jury system suffer from any flaws? Is the grand jury still an effective mechanism of the judicial system? Explain. And here is my response:The Fifth Amendment contains several guarantees for those involved in the criminal justice system, and one of its provisions is that the person cannot be tried for a "capital or otherwise infamous crime" without being heard by a grand jury. Unlike a trial or petit jury, a grand jury is composed of citizens, not necessarily peers, who must determine whether the accused will be sent to trial. There are typically 16-23 individuals, and 12 must be in agreement to indict. The rights of the accused are fairly limited in a grand jury hearing, not able to have counsel or provide evidence in their favor, but the jury is not attempting to determine guilt or innocence, but rather if the government has enough evidence to bring charges against them. It may also investigate misconduct, while a trial jury cannot.The Supreme Court has held that a grand jury hearing is not integral to Due Process and states therefore decide whether or not to incorporate it (Harr et al., 2017). Grand juries serve the integral purpose of preventing arbitrary government prosecution. They ensure that the government has enough evidence to indict before an innocent person is dragged through a legal process. The process also helps to take some of the pressure off of the legal system by ensuring that only valid cases go to trial (Harr et al., 2017). The use of a grand jury, however, is a controversial topic among the judiciary. A common criticism is the obvious favor shown to the prosecution, with the accused unable to have their lawyer present, everything is kept secret, and typically inadmissible evidence may be used. The secrecy especially is condemned as going against the American judicial tradition of openness. Meanwhile, proponents argue that the grand jury provides an avenue for the people to become involved in the judicial system and have some authority over how it is run.