[rxsid]

"The defense needs to call him anyway so the jury can hear him invoke when that ask him about taking drugs that day"

Agreed. He'd be invoking after every question. Would be damaging, at least subconsciously, for the jury to hear that.

However, the guy's attorney has asked the court to squash any subpoena for his client to testify. The way courts are these days, I'd bet the judge grants the request knowing either way, Mr. Hall would be bad for the prosecutors.

[SecAmndmt]

“However, the guy’s attorney has asked the court to squash any subpoena for his client to testify. The way courts are these days, I’d bet the judge grants the request knowing either way, Mr. Hall would be bad for the prosecutors.”

The trial judge might quash it, but would it stand? Defense would surely seek mandamus

[shotgun]

Agreed. The courts and the prosecutors are in bed together. That is why is hard to overturn obvious wrongful convictions.

The irony of this is the majority of prosecutors and judges are liberal democrats that stack the scales of justice against minorities and then blame racism on white republicans.

Just ask Amy Knoblocker.