I’ve never been under the auspicious eyes of a grand jury, so I couldn’t tell you. Sure, why not. They’re meant to add a bunch of laypeople to the decision on whether to indict a person. If Trump showed up, would they be throwing eggs at the man?
His legal team could have presented contravening evidence. When a yokel jury convenes, if they don’t get any evidence that contradicts the DA, the DA is the only one talking to the yokels, so the yokels are more likely than not going to indict.
No defense evidence or defense theories are allowed at a grand jury hearing. A “grand jury target” has no right to attend or even have legal counsel attend. If invited, the only one that asks questions witnesses or introduces evidence is the prosecutor. PERIOD. It would definitely be a huge mistake for anyone, not just DJT, to testify at their own grand jury hearings.
Defense can’t present evidence at a GJ. There was zero reason for Trump to show up to this kangaroo court where Smith would likely go for a perjury trap.
It’s hilarious to me that you seem to think this isn’t already completely rigged against Trump.
I’ve been on a grand jury in the past year.
Actually there is nothing funnier than a bunch of grand jurors who are fed up with some prosecutor who was over reaching. They get so upset.
That aside, any defendant would be under oath and the GJ would not be limited about what they can ask. And the defendant’s lawyer just sits there.
There is no up side to a defendant testifying.
I was always under the impression that the defense was allowed a presence at a grand jury hearing. I know it’s not a full-blown trial, so there is probably a lot that is not found in a constitutional trial and civil rights don’t apply there.
Regardless, I’d want to know who gets to pick the jurors. How are they vetted?