2010.07.26 Grand Jury begins

[BeanE]

Above underlined by me.... This part worries me that possibly DeDe told ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! If she can refuse to answer because of self-incrimination then we get NOTHING!! I guess the DA could offer immunity in exchange for her testiminy but I do not know how ofthen something like that is offered?? Anyone know, or know any details which this would or would not apply to her?

I don't think she sat with detectives for 3 1/2 hours and said nothing.

 

[Adalena935]

I'm not expecting this session today to result in any immediate break in the case, or any arrests, personally.

The fact the GJ convened on Kyron's case is a huge incident in and of itself. They have quite a parade of witnesses in this case against Terri Horman. I don't see them saying; "aw heck let it go there's not enough to prosecute only witnesses to murder for hire, a missing young child with witnesses of the defendant lying to the school officials to set up alibi's the day the child vanished and witnesses who saw her leaving the school with him. Also witnesses from the gym. Also witnesses who had missing time with her and her attempting to mislead investigators in the boy's kidnapping by telling them she was one place when phone records show she was 10 miles away at the time she told investigators she was at the school. I don't even think they'll need all the witnesses before the GJ to hand down an indictment on her.

My impression is the DA has way more than enough to cook her goose at trial and win handily. Whether they ever find Kyron or not. They can put her away for quite some time regardless. All my opinion based on news of the case.

 

[BeanE]

I don't know for certain, but I was under the impression that the defense has no part in a GJ proceeding, and that there are no attorneys present in the room while the witness is testifying (other than the prosecutor, of course). IIRC, they can request to leave the room to speak to their attorney. I THINK.

This stuff was discussed ad nauseam back during the Clinton / Lewinsky thing. I do remember the part about the witness' attorney waiting outside, because that surprised me someone could be forced to testify without representation present. Of course, each state would have their own rules I guess.

Well I closed the window now but a little while ago I was reading and saw that the person being investigated and their attorney can request to present evidence before the GJ, but it is up to the prosecutor whether or not to grant the request. They said prosecutors usually do grant the requests.

 

[Leila]

Thanks for the link .... I've been trying to figure out who the cousin was..:waitasec:

From what the cousin said initially, I think DD's mother and the cousin's father are brother and sister.

 

[gitana1]

Perhaps Dede was cooperative with the investigation in many areas of their questioning. And then again, perhaps Dede was not cooperative with the investigation in other certain areas of questioning. (Since we now the greyish definition of the word cooperative.)

I took their letter (regarding DS not cooperating and withholding info) to mean that they were made privy to evidence that DS may know something but never volunteered it to LE to help find Kyron and that she wrote e-mails or text messages telling other people not to say anything to LE about anything. My guess is that as a result of that letter and the bad publicity, DS may have suddenly decided to cooperate. The letter, the publicity was the catalyst. Hence, her 3 hour interview with LE. Wish I knew for sure.

 

[Adalena935]

Above underlined by me.... This part worries me that possibly DeDe told ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! If she can refuse to answer because of self-incrimination then we get NOTHING!! I guess the DA could offer immunity in exchange for her testiminy but I do not know how ofthen something like that is offered?? Anyone know, or know any details which this would or would not apply to her?

That applies to the federal system that you underlined. I don't know what the rules are for state/county. It seems to me they do differ from one another but I don't know in what ways obviously.

 

[SmoothOperator]

I don't think she sat with detectives for 3 1/2 hours and said nothing.

I so hope she spilled it all! But just was going by the privileges quoted where a subponeaed person could refuse to testify and among others it did say if it caused self-incrimination.
I guess I'm hoping DeDes role was benign enough that she wouldnt fall under this category(as in watching baby K for an hour was her part) though I hope she knows ENOUGH about what happened that her testimony amounts to something BIG!... MY MAIN THING IS I JUST HOPE THAT HER TESTIMONY WOULDNT FALL INTO A "LOOP HOLE" CATEGORY SUCH AS THIS AND THAT NOTHING BECOMES OF TODAYS GJ. I pray that this is finally the break we've been waiting for, for Kyron.

 

[Adalena935]

I took their letter (regarding DS not cooperating and withholding info) to mean that they were made privy to evidence that DS may know something but never volunteered it to LE to help find Kyron and that she wrote e-mails or text messages telling other people not to say anything to LE about anything. My guess is that as a result of that letter and the bad publicity, DS may have suddenly decided to cooperate. The letter, the publicity was the catalyst. Hence, her 3 hour interview with LE. Wish I knew for sure.

That would be my best guess too. Good job!

 

[Barry]

Do I understand correctly, that they can convene a GJ on the same matter as many times as they want? So, it's not a huge risk on the DA's part running it by a GJ?

 

[JSR]

Yes, I agree - esp. for criminal trials of this nature where the defense has no idea what evidence there is to refute - I don't recall the defense showing up in front of the GJ.

I just didn't want to make a blanket statement, as I think sometimes defense does request to show their own evidence to the GJ to avoid trial...

Nope. Grand Jurys are a one sided deal. The defense does not get to offer any information/evidence. And they don't get to cross examine witnesses.

 

[cluciano63]

I don't think Dede decided to cooperate based on D&K's threats. She may already have been speaking to LE or just waiting until a lawyer could be with her. We don't know when exactly she had the 3+ hour conversation or when it was arranged. I think D&K may have jumped to the conclusion she was incooperative if LE had not yet interviewed her whenever D&K asked LE about her, if they did.

 

[Calliope]

Above underlined by me.... This part worries me that possibly DeDe told ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! If she can refuse to answer because of self-incrimination then we get NOTHING!! I guess the DA could offer immunity in exchange for her testiminy but I do not know how ofthen something like that is offered?? Anyone know, or know any details which this would or would not apply to her?

No one can be compelled to incriminate themselves, which the Supreme Court stated can happen even if the person is innocent and telling the truth.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=00-1028


The Supreme Court of Ohio here held that a witness who denies all culpability does not have a valid Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Because our precedents dictate that the privilege protects the innocent as well as the guilty, and that the facts here are sufficient to sustain a claim of privilege, we grant the petition for certiorari and reverse.


But we have never held, as the Supreme Court of Ohio did, that the privilege is unavailable to those who claim innocence. To the contrary, we have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendment's "basic functions ... is to protect innocent men ... 'who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances.' " ... truthful responses of an innocent witness, as well as those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence from the speaker's own mouth.

Considering there appears to be evidence that DeDe was with Terri (at least after the fact) and that she "disappeared" for a period of time during that morning on the day Kyron went missing, I'd think this would apply to her. JMO

 

[Adalena935]

I so hope she spilled it all! But just was going by the privileges quoted where a subponeaed person could refuse to testify and among others it did say if it caused self-incrimination.
I guess I'm hoping DeDes role was benign enough that she wouldnt fall under this category(as in watching baby K for an hour was her part) though I hope she knows ENOUGH about what happened that her testimony amounts to something BIG!... MY MAIN THING IS I JUST HOPE THAT HER TESTIMONY WOULDNT FALL INTO A "LOOP HOLE" CATEGORY SUCH AS THIS AND THAT NOTHING BECOMES OF TODAYS GJ. I pray that this is finally the break we've been waiting for, for Kyron.

I think she talked to save her own hide and she knows a lot more than babysitting the baby. I have little doubt the grand jury will hand down an indictment on Terri. It may take a few weeks but not much beyond that is my best estimate.

 

[gibby207]

I'm thudless. I hope they can find Kyron now.

 

[Aedrys]

I took their letter (regarding DS not cooperating and withholding info) to mean that they were made privy to evidence that DS may know something but never volunteered it to LE to help find Kyron and that she wrote e-mails or text messages telling other people not to say anything to LE about anything. My guess is that as a result of that letter and the bad publicity, DS may have suddenly decided to cooperate. The letter, the publicity was the catalyst. Hence, her 3 hour interview with LE. Wish I knew for sure.

That is exactly what I hoped happened. Standing by a friend in bad times is one thing. I'm not quite sure she's ready to go down with TH, especially with her father in law enforcement, for what happened to Kyron. I don't think she'd embarrass her father just to help her friend save her butt, unless she hates her dad or something. But there's been nothing to suggest that. I really hope she told what she knew in front of that Grand Jury and didn't just say "I exercise my 5th Amendment rights" a hundred times and then left.

 

[cluciano63]

Wouldn't LE try to speed up this GR process a bit if they honestly thought Kyron might be alive somewhere? Get people in and out one right after another?

 

[grandmaj]

Dede's attorney is mincing words. From anything I can read an investigative Grand Jury investigates organized crime and improper conduct of public officials in some states. Not criminal cases. We need an attorney to weigh in here.

DeDe's testimony could have been brief if she asserted her rights under the 5th amendment. THEORY.

This is the tricky part.

What is a grant of immunity?
A grant of immunity to a grand jury witness overcomes the witness's privilege against self-incrimination, and the witness is then required to testify. The prosecutor is prohibited from using that testimony or leads from it to bring charges against the witness. If a subsequent prosecution is brought, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving that all of its evidence was obtained independent of the immunized testimony. In practice, it is difficult to successfully prosecute someone for criminal activity they discussed in immunized testimony unless the prosecution had a fully prepared case before immunity was granted.

Many states grant the witness "transactional immunity," barring prosecution for a transaction discussed in the immunized testimony regardless of whether there are independent sources of evidence.

I am of the opinion this is a true Grand Jury collecting evidence and "Investigating" to determine whether there is probable cause to indict.

http://www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html

 

[STEADFAST]

Here is a link to the Oregon grand jury statutes. It tells about who can be in the room during the proceedings, what kind of evidence can be presented, how the jury reaches its decision, etc.
http://law.onecle.com/oregon/132-grand-jury-indictments-and-other/index.html

This answers most of the questions about what rules are specific to Oregon.

 

[nursebeeme]

Dede's attorney is mincing words. From anything I can read an investigative Grand Jury investigates organized crime and improper conduct of public officials in some states. Not criminal cases. We need an attorney to weigh in here.

DeDe's testimony could have been brief if she asserted her rights under the 5th amendment. THEORY.

This is the tricky part.

What is a grant of immunity?
A grant of immunity to a grand jury witness overcomes the witness's privilege against self-incrimination, and the witness is then required to testify. The prosecutor is prohibited from using that testimony or leads from it to bring charges against the witness. If a subsequent prosecution is brought, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving that all of its evidence was obtained independent of the immunized testimony. In practice, it is difficult to successfully prosecute someone for criminal activity they discussed in immunized testimony unless the prosecution had a fully prepared case before immunity was granted.

Many states grant the witness "transactional immunity," barring prosecution for a transaction discussed in the immunized testimony regardless of whether there are independent sources of evidence.

I am of the opinion this is a true Grand Jury collecting evidence and "Investigating" to determine whether there is probably cause to indict.

http://www.abanet.org/media/faqjury.html

Ms Grandma I am with you 100%.... especially on the mincing part. If this atty were mincing onions out in washington my eyes would be watering uncontrollably right now over here in the beautiful state of Michigan!

 

[Kimmer]

I wonder if the 3 hour meeting that Kaine had last week, may have been him testifying in front of the GJ?

Also as far as DS appearing in front of the GJ only with a subpoena I would think that would have everything to do with the fact that when you are subpoenaed you also are given limited use immunity, and that means you cannot be prosecuted if you have information that would incriminate yourself, so I would imagine that her own attorney would have demanded her be subpoenaed.