[sumthinelse]

"2nd drug incident" sounds like a euphemism. You know what he meant by "grants of immunity." It appears to me that Sutton let a drug smuggler go free to avoid embarrassment.

And this is just one part of the government's sleazy behavior in this case.

[erton1]

I am very aware of what immunity means. If immunity was agreed to in the 2nd drug incident, why did OAD invoke the 5th amendment during the bill of review proffer? I suggest you read up on the facts of the 2nd incident. It was a state task force bust, not federal, no drugs were found on OAD, and the evidence was based on double hearsay. Plus it is questionable that the evidence is admissible under the federal rules of evidence, rules 608 and 802. I anticipate that this is point the 5th circuit will decide.