Under our Constitution, nobody can be forced to provide evidence against himself. Further, evidence extracted contrary to law is not admissible in a trial.
The prosecutors don`t know what he will say. But rather than put him on the witness stand and have him sit all day refusing to answer based on his right against self-incrimination, they have chosen to grant him immunity.
In effect, they promise whatever he says cannot be used to prosecute him further.
These prosecutors are not the creme of the crop. They were unable to convict him on a single one of the charges against him. But they had the option of trying him over and over, serially, for each item the jury in his trial was unable to decide unanimously.
Faced with this, he made a deal with them. He would plead guilty to one charge, serve a few more months and be deported. He had already been imprisoned in solitary for several years by the time his first trial started. |
|
