then why should Fitzgerald offer her any accomodations? either she tells all, or indict her. what's the sense of restricting the scope of her testimony such that she can say next to nothing, and still walk. wasn't the purpose of putting her in jail to get the whole story?
The limiting of the scope is just spin from the NY Times. They are just trying to blow smoke when the truth is Judith was told by Fitzgeral testify on Friday or her criminal contempt indictment will be released on Monday and she'd have to spend another 6 months in jail. Fitzgerald is playing hardball.