3 ms·
At least a public deposition would allow people to come to their own conclusion. If Chelsea felt that public questioning was one sided and a smear campaign the
by throw20102010 7y ago
At least a public deposition would allow people to come to their own conclusion. If Chelsea felt that public questioning was one sided and a smear campaign then she could release a statement afterwards filling in the context and pointing out the other side of the story.
With a grand jury it is illegal to discuss anything, so a one sided smear campaign during a grand jury can lead to an indictment and Chelsea would have no opportunity to offer her side of the story without risking more jail time.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> With a grand jury it is illegal to discuss anything No, it is not; grand jury secrecy rules apply to attorneys, court officials, grand jurors, and government staff to whom material is disclosed to assist attorneys, but not to witnesses called before the grand jury. So, actually, not only would Manning be allowed to present her side of the story, no one with actual knowledge of her time before the grand jury would be allowed to contradict it.
- travmatt 7y agoAdditionally, it’s pretty nonsensical to claim that prosecutors will use public show trials to smear opponents, but allowing them to publicly smear opponents would make the proceeding more fair?