Yeah, this is bullshit.
The fifth amendment makes them necessary.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger.
I suppose that the government could choose to repeal all the felonies, or reduce them to misdemeanors (with the implication that no one convicted of such a newly reclassified offense would serve more than one year), But that’s not likely to happen and thus the usefulness of grand juries persists.
but perhaps she can claim privilege.See
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, 662 F.3d 65 (1st Cir. 2011)
1 Like
Is there any indication that this tactic is being used?
Good point, but in cases of Grand Jury abuse the prosecutor doesn’t need that specific testimony available at trial. They are effectively conducting a police investigation using the power of the Grand Jury to compel interrogations, and then using parallel construction to build a clean case for trial using the same evidence.
Sure, in theory. In practice 5th amendment protection acts as a significant roadblock to invasive investigation of activist movements. The combination of interrogation with minimal oversight (you can’t have your own attorney when being interrogated, it’s just the prosecutor) and selective qualified immunity creates a situation where the prosecutor can have it both ways.
Obviously Grand Juries are legal. All the rules have been determined by the courts to be technically constitutional, etc. But the rules are bad for a free society because they’re used to repress dissident movements. We should not accept that.
2 Likes
No, this isn’t the Mueller investigation. It’s an investigation into Julian Assange.
1 Like
It does seem to be a separate investigation/indictment not under Mueller. But WikiLeaks is a subject of the Mueller probe, and we know there’s an indictment against Assange thanks to some paperwork mistakes. But we don’t know if that spun out of Mueller, or if it’s something pre-existing. It does seem to be a separate grand jury, and the Mueller grand juries haven’t met recently.
We’re all your Waston today!
2 Likes
Why would we not want to have her testify about Assange who worked directly with Putin’s Russia to meddle in our election and elect Trump?
Please explain this to me.
2 Likes
In case anyone is reading this, Chelsea Manning lost her motion and will be testifying.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
