I talked to a detective I know and here are some generalities.
He says that criminals are generally stupid, and that's why they get caught. Some are smarter than others, but the odds run out the longer they commit crimes.
He can't recall having a defense attorney present during an interview, but regardless of that, he would never tell a suspect that it would go easier if he confessed. Deals are made between the defense attorney and the deputy district attorney, not among the detective, the suspect, and the defense attorney.
The interviews on the show are necessarily weighted to Danny because of time constraints, and they have Danny with enough evidence or witness statements to make the suspect confess.
He said that hard core ex-cons immediately invoke their rights when questioned. He remembers one case where one guy invoked. The DDA offered him 5 years and he refused. He was convicted at trial and got over 30 years.
In a couple of cases where he thought there was hope for the suspect because of age and the circumstances of the crime, he took it upon himself to approach the DDA and ask for leniency. He did not tell the suspect or the defense attorney he was going to do this.
The statement that documents got jumbled is shaky but might be allowed on its face. What jumps out is that prosecutors are having trouble identifying where some of the documents were found. That could mean that evidence collection was flawed, or worse, documents were placed in boxes sometime after the search. "Planted" would be the term.
Cannon should order a pause at least, and tell the DOJ to provide a list of documents they are having trouble with regarding where they were found. If the DOJ cannot certify where the documents were found, the obvious response from Trump's attorneys would be: "It's because they were never there!"
"He is not under trial for a criminal offense. Is he still allowed to take the fifth? That is the question."
I can't give a good answer to that. If in his mind, there was something that could incriminate him if he answered the question, then he can assert the 5th. As another FReeper posted, a judge can order him to answer the question. But I don't know where that would go from there either.
I won’t defend this guy, but if I were being questioned about a case and I had any doubts of where the investigation was going, I would also plead the 5th.
"Smith will say Biden, Pence, both Clintons and Jim Comey all cooperated fully while Trump didn’t, BS for sure, but Cannon won’t buy it."
Smith would be foolish to try to advance that line of thinking. Cannon could easily find instances to refute Smith, and she can further ask why a deal wasn't made then. If they cooperated, the violations were not the type of thing that could be ignored. Cooperation should have led to substantial Federal time served, not selective non-prosecution.
05/03/2024 8:47:14 AM PDT
· 29 of 30 Enterprise
to Freedumb; telescope115; metmom
I doubt that Sharpton gives a fig. What I think he is doing is telegraphing the Democrats that he is unhappy about the financial aid being given to illegal aliens. That money, belongs to the gibsmedat crowd.