Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Bill:
I certainly would like to know the whole story. I wonder if we ever
will. Somehow I doubt it. :(
I just know that most people would not go through what she is going
through because of loyalty to a friend. Especially when that friend has
shown that he will not do anything to help her in any way. Most
wouldn't even do this for a family member. (there is no life on the
line)
And the fact that she is willing to talk to anyone else, including
another special investigator, says that there is something wrong here.
Why doesn't Starr just have her talk to (get a depo) Janet Reno or
someone else, get her side of the story, and present it before the Grand
Jury.
At least, if it could be done that way, and if he did that, and she
refused, her story wouldn't sound as credible to people, like me, as it
does now.
Sue
> HI Sue,
>
> Perhaps if we knew the entire story about how Ken Starr and his henchmen
> have conducted the investigation with her we would understand why she
> refuses to testify before a Grand Jury that they are running. A witness
> at a Grand Jury does not have the privilege of having a lawyer present as
> would be afforded at a Congressional hearing.
>
> Bill
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
