There could be. Grand Juries are told to take into account whether someone took the fifth when discussing whether to indict. The fact they did is not admissible in trial court but it can be considered during indictment deliberations.
A bit off issue but something I never forgot: I was a witness accompanying a senior agent during discussions with an attorney who was representing the target of his inquiry. The attorney was cordial but in response to an invitation to let his client be interviewed he pointed to an enormous fish he had on a wall. He said to the agent, go look at the inscription on that plaque. The inscription said: I would not be here if I had not opened my mouth. The attorney said my client is not going to talk, he is not going to be indicted, he is not going to be convicted and he is not going to jail, goodbye. He was right!
In the 60s, that attorney's retainer was 50K and he earned that money with his simple theory, say nothing.
Yep. Say nothing. Prosecutors.. etc. are adept at getting people to forget that is what you are suppose to do. Most people know you arent suppose to talk..but they do it anyway
Indictment because you took the 5th is not a conviction because you didn't, right?