[usnavy_cop_retired]

I can see two reaons for asking for this.

1, she gets two trials going at the same time with different judges, (hoping to get a liberal judge for the second trial and a conviction or plea bargain).

2, By splitting up the defendents she can offer immunity for the two defendents in order to lie about the facts against the other four.

The defense would be stupid to accept this since if even one defendent is considered by the jury to have been overcharged or not responsible for Gray’s death the likelyhood of the others getting acquitted is higher, (or at least a low misdemeanor conviction for them.

[sickoflibs]

RE:”, By splitting up the defendents she can offer immunity for the two defendents in order to lie about the facts against the other four.
The defense would be stupid to accept this since if even one defendent is considered by the jury to have been overcharged or not responsible for Gray’s death the likelyhood of the others getting acquitted is higher, (or at least a low misdemeanor conveiction for them.”

I agree with you 100%. Her case is so bad that she is trying to force some of them to turn on the others to create a case.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply on this.