Inthedetails
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2014
- Messages
- 25,881
- Reaction score
- 160,170
I'm unclear what the immunity covers. Is it just an agreement they won't charge her for previously lying to the cops? Or is it more of a blanket immunity of agreeing not to charge her with anything having to do with crimes against Maddie?I agree iamshadow21….. and even more perplexing IMO…… if the state really thinks they need JS for any testimony or evidence….. why no charges? Isn’t it often seen where multiple parties are charged, and eventually one might either cooperate or agree to lesser charges or a plea in exchange for testimony against another?
I am still confused why JS was offered a proffer or ‘Queen for a Day’ (my term…. IANAL) for evidence in this case. Unless it was only an opportunity to allow them to get more information or evidence. And to further check facts and inconsistencies. MOO
I just get the hunch she was still lying in that interview....and she was involved somehow, though I don't know to what extent. Yet, she is not charged with a thing.
jmo