Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lewinsky Testimony May Be Near
> WASHINGTON (AP) -- After three months of cat-and-mouse
> maneuvering, prosecutors' chances of getting Monica
> Lewinsky to testify before a grand jury on their own
> terms may be improving.
>
> And with or without her testimony, there is plenty of
> legal and political combustion yet to come as the
> investigation into President Clinton's relationship
> with the former White House intern inches forward.
>
> ``For the president, the most dangerous component of
> this investigation remains ahead,'' said Jonathan
> Turley, a law professor at George Washington
> University. ``The final stage is always the most
> precarious and dangerous for the critical players.''
>
> As for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, he has new
> leverage to try and push Ms. Lewinsky to testify about
> her relationship with the president now that a federal
> judge has rejected her argument that she had a binding
> promise of full immunity from prosecution in exchange
> for her testimony.
>
> Starr must now decide whether to try to secure her
> cooperation on grounds more favorable to the
> prosecution, force her to testify with a grant of
> limited immunity from a judge, or indict her.
>
> ``That is ultimately a critical decision for them
> because she remains the single most important witness
> in the investigation,'' said Bruce Yannett, a
> white-collar criminal defense lawyer.
>
> What Ms. Lewinsky's attorneys were seeking from
> prosecutors is typically called full immunity -- a
> promise not to prosecute on any charges. Prosecutors
> still can offer her limited immunity -- a promise not
> to prosecute her for anything she reveals to the grand
> jury.
>
> William Ginsburg, her chief lawyer, said Thursday he
> does not yet have a written order from the judge but
> will appeal if it goes against his client. In the
> meantime, he said he is no rush to get back to
> Washington and reopen talks with prosecutors.
>
> ``Things are really rather slow from our perspective,''
> he told The Associated Press in an interview. ``Monica
> and I are going to stay in Los Angeles until there is a
> need to go back to Washington.''
>
> He said his position remains the same -- his client
> won't testify unless she has some form of immunity.
>
> Clinton must wait ``for the other shoe to drop, and the
> other shoe is Monica Lewinsky,'' said Barbara Nicastro,
> a former Justice Department prosecutor.
>
> The president, who has denied having sexual relations
> with Ms. Lewinsky or engaging in any sort of cover-up,
> dismissed suggestions at a midday news conference that
> the possibility of her testifying should prompt him to
> offer a fuller explanation.
>
> ``I really believe it's important for me not to say any
> more about this,'' he said.
>
> So far, more than four dozen other witnesses have
> testified before the grand jury as Starr gathers
> evidence from lesser players in the unfolding White
> House drama.
>
> In addition to the matter of Ms. Lewinsky's testimony,
> there are a number of other big questions still to be
> answered. Among them:
>
> --When will Linda Tripp testify and what will she say?
> She is the one-time friend of Ms. Lewinsky who secretly
> recorded conversations in which the young woman claimed
> she had an affair with the president. Tripp is
> cooperating with Starr's investigation but he has been
> holding off on calling her before the grand jury.
>
> --Can Secret Service officers be forced to testify
> about the president's activities? Officials at the
> Justice and Treasury departments are arguing that
> unless officers are excused from testifying, future
> presidents will not allow them close enough to provide
> effective protection. Starr's office maintains that law
> enforcement officers shouldn't be barred from
> testifying about potentially criminal behavior.
>
> --Can White House aides be forced to testify about
> their private conversations with the president or the
> first lady or among themselves? Clinton has invoked
> executive privilege to keep some conversations
> confidential; Starr's camp claims the privilege doesn't
> extend to such private matters as the Lewinsky
> allegations.
>
> Many legal experts have questioned the merits of the
> president's legal challenges. But if nothing else, they
> have served to slow the pace of Starr's investigation.
>
> ``If you have the lawyers, you can buy lots of time and
> make things very difficult for investigators,'' said
> Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor.
> ``Ken Starr's doing the best he can, but he's inching
> ahead rather than galloping ahead.
>
> ``Where it all leads, anyone can guess.''
>
> For now, the president's poll ratings are sky high, Ms.
> Lewinsky has been out on a Malibu beach for a celebrity
> photo shoot, and polls show that most Americans think
> it's time for the country to move on.
>
> But Starr appears determined to press ahead, saying
> recently that ``the end is not yet in sight'' for his
> investigation. And Clinton said Thursday it would be
> ``inappropriate'' for him to seek the prosecutor's
> ouster.
>
--
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
