Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: j g cordes who wrote (4342)	9/10/1998 9:04:00 AM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

<<If the grand jury process discovers evidence through means unacceptable under normal rules of evidence, or by threatening of witnesses, or by any other means unacceptable to normal rights of representation and self incrimination_ can that "evidence" be used for prosecution at some future date. >> This is a major assumption on your part. This GJ has been bound by the same rules as any other GJ. There is no threatening of witnesses, etc, and no one has given up their rights against self-incrimination. The 5th amendment is alive and well. If criminal charges are brought, it will be tried in a regular court, subject to all the regular rules of evidence. <<Grand Jury testimony is supposed to be held in secret.. does bringing it to Congress compromise the rights of the hundreds of people who testified? >> Another assumption. We don't know yet if any GJ testimony is included in the Starr report. However, if it is, it may be perfectly legitimate. Some of the talking heads on the various analysis shows have pointed to parts of the law that would give Congress access to the GJ testimony. Just for this discussion, though, let's say you're right. Did the people that testified really believe their testimony would remain secret when the case was being made against the President? I doubt it.