need to be indicted

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "need to be indicted" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in legal contexts when discussing the necessity of formally charging someone with a crime. Example: "The evidence presented in court suggests that the suspect may need to be indicted for their alleged involvement in the crime."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Formal & Business

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

1 human-written examples

If that's not the greatest movie of all time, then they will need to be indicted on charges of false advertising.

TechCrunch

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

58 human-written examples

In Manhattan Criminal Court, the supervising judge, Melissa Jackson, gave prosecutors "good-cause extensions" on cases that needed to be indicted by Wednesday but were not because the storm kept away grand jurors, judges and the defendants.

The New York Times

Wilson was not going to be indicted.

The Guardian

He had expected to be indicted and wasn't.

The New York Times

More were expected to be indicted on Wednesday and Thursday.

The New York Times

Nor did he expect Dunn to be indicted.

The New Yorker

Mr Fletcher becomes the third Kentucky governor to be indicted.

The Economist

They are scheduled to be indicted in New York next Tuesday.

The New York Times

The company is scheduled to be indicted next week.

The New York Times

"He is going to be indicted," Mr. Montanha said.

The New York Times

Mr. Stanford has said he expects to be indicted.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "need to be indicted", ensure the context clearly establishes the legal or ethical reasons supporting the necessity of the indictment. Providing evidence or rationale strengthens the statement's impact.

Common error

Avoid using "need to be indicted" without adequate evidence or justification. Overstating the necessity of indictment can lead to accusations of bias or prejudice. Ensure the statement is supported by facts and legal standards.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "need to be indicted" functions as a passive construction expressing a requirement or necessity for someone to be formally charged with a crime. As Ludwig AI confirms, it’s grammatically correct and common in legal contexts.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

75%

Formal & Business

15%

Science

10%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "need to be indicted" is a grammatically sound and frequently used expression, predominantly found in news and legal contexts. Ludwig AI confirms its correctness and usability. It conveys the opinion that someone should be formally charged with a crime based on available evidence. While it's a common phrase, using it judiciously with clear justification ensures its impact and avoids any misinterpretations or accusations of bias. Related phrases like "should be charged" or "must face charges" offer alternative ways to express a similar sentiment. Remember to always contextualize the use of "need to be indicted" with evidence and reasoning to avoid overstatement.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

should be charged

Replaces "need" with "should", suggesting a recommendation rather than a strict necessity.

ought to be prosecuted

Uses "ought to" instead of "need to", implying a moral obligation or duty to prosecute.

must face charges

Emphasizes the obligation to face legal charges, replacing the passive "be indicted" with an active construction.

warrants an indictment

Shifts the focus to the action that justifies the indictment, rather than the necessity.

requires formal charges

Highlights the requirement of formal charges, using a more direct and less legally specific term.

demands prosecution

Emphasizes the urgency or justification for prosecution, suggesting a strong need for legal action.

is subject to indictment

Indicates the likelihood or possibility of indictment, rather than the necessity.

is liable to be charged

Focuses on legal liability and the potential for charges to be filed.

should be brought to trial

Emphasizes the need for a trial, which follows indictment, rather than the indictment itself.

has to answer for the crime

Shifts the focus to accountability for the crime, rather than the formal process of indictment.

FAQs

What does it mean when someone says a person "needs to be indicted"?

It means that based on available information, there is a strong argument to formally charge someone with a crime. This suggests that the evidence is substantial enough to warrant the legal process of indictment, where a grand jury determines if there is sufficient cause to proceed with a trial.

Are there alternatives to saying "need to be indicted" that convey a similar meaning?

Yes, alternatives include phrases like "should be charged", "must face charges", or "warrants an indictment", each carrying slightly different connotations of obligation or justification.

When is it appropriate to use the phrase "need to be indicted"?

This phrase is appropriate when discussing potential legal proceedings, analyzing evidence in a case, or expressing an opinion on whether someone should face criminal charges. It's often used in news reports, legal analyses, and discussions about justice and accountability.

What's the difference between "need to be indicted" and "will be indicted"?

"Need to be indicted" suggests a perceived necessity or justification for indictment based on available information. "Will be indicted" implies a future certainty or expectation that an indictment is forthcoming, often based on inside knowledge or legal predictions. The former expresses a belief or opinion, while the latter implies a prediction.