livingston
20×102mm Vulcan
Robert Mueller Laid A Trap For President Trump By Marking Him An Investigation ‘Subject’
Whether someone is a ‘target’ as opposed to a ‘subject’ of an investigation is a distinction without a difference.
By George Parry
April 10, 2018
Special counsel Robert Mueller has reportedly advised Donald Trump’s lawyers that the president is a “subject” but not a “target” of Mueller’s investigation. This has resulted in a great deal of triumphal celebration among the president’s supporters. After all, they reason, if Mueller hasn’t by now dredged up enough evidence to designate Trump a “target,” then the president must be in the clear.
Unfortunately, whether someone is a “target” as opposed to a “subject” of an investigation is a distinction without a difference. It’s all a matter of timing, and the “subject” of an investigation can become a “target” in the blink of a prosecutor’s eye. It happens every day.
Here are excerpts from the U.S. Attorneys’ Manual that lay out the official policy regarding the treatment of “subjects” and “targets” in grand jury investigations.
It is the policy of the Department of Justice to advise a grand jury witness of his or her rights if such witness is a ‘target’ or ‘subject’ of a grand jury investigation…
A ‘target’ is a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.
A ‘subject’ of an investigation is a person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury’s investigation.
The manual provides that, before they testify in the grand jury, “targets” and “subjects” are to be given the exact same warnings against self-incrimination, save that a “target” should also be given “a supplemental warning that the witness’s conduct is being investigated for possible violation of federal criminal law.” These designations apply with equal force to interrogations outside the grand jury.
More at ... Robert Mueller Laid A Trap For Trump By Marking Him A ‘Subject’
Whether someone is a ‘target’ as opposed to a ‘subject’ of an investigation is a distinction without a difference.
By George Parry
April 10, 2018
Special counsel Robert Mueller has reportedly advised Donald Trump’s lawyers that the president is a “subject” but not a “target” of Mueller’s investigation. This has resulted in a great deal of triumphal celebration among the president’s supporters. After all, they reason, if Mueller hasn’t by now dredged up enough evidence to designate Trump a “target,” then the president must be in the clear.
Unfortunately, whether someone is a “target” as opposed to a “subject” of an investigation is a distinction without a difference. It’s all a matter of timing, and the “subject” of an investigation can become a “target” in the blink of a prosecutor’s eye. It happens every day.
Here are excerpts from the U.S. Attorneys’ Manual that lay out the official policy regarding the treatment of “subjects” and “targets” in grand jury investigations.
It is the policy of the Department of Justice to advise a grand jury witness of his or her rights if such witness is a ‘target’ or ‘subject’ of a grand jury investigation…
A ‘target’ is a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.
A ‘subject’ of an investigation is a person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury’s investigation.
The manual provides that, before they testify in the grand jury, “targets” and “subjects” are to be given the exact same warnings against self-incrimination, save that a “target” should also be given “a supplemental warning that the witness’s conduct is being investigated for possible violation of federal criminal law.” These designations apply with equal force to interrogations outside the grand jury.
More at ... Robert Mueller Laid A Trap For Trump By Marking Him A ‘Subject’