Grand Jury Testimony

We have a few Congressmen who think it is not important that are contemplating releasing the Muller report in its entirety which includes Grand Jury testimony.  I was on the Starr Grand Jury which looked at one case - President Clinton's activities in Washington D.C.  We met one week a month for 18 months.

It is not as simple as it appears to be.  There were 3 Starr Grand Juries - one in Maryland, one in Washington D.C. and one in Virginia, each looking at potential crimes committed in their jurisdictions.  All of those were combined in the final report and we never saw the others unless we needed to see parts which related to our cases.  The final report is much more inclusive than any single Grand Jury ever hears.

Lots of people testified, some reluctantly.  A few would leave and consult with an attorney because none are allowed in when they testified.  A few were giving us "canned" statements that were obviously not spontaneous.  Some of them were not able to answer follow-up questions very well and looked confused.  That doesn't show up in written testimony.  We thought a couple of them were lying, but we had little to go on except a feeling that what they were saying was a lie.  This is the nature of juries that decide guilt or innocence ( a Grand Jury doesn't) but the feeling that a jury has only shows up in a verdict.  You can see none of the non-verbal cues that go with that testimony in a transcript.

Most of all, some people who were more involved than in concealing or contributing to potential crimes were not indicted.  It would have been better for the public to not know who those people were or, in one case, what that person had done.  The absence of an indictment of one person can limit what can be indicted in another part of the case.  That is why Grand Jury information is protected the way it is.

Before you say, "Well, that's OK."  I don't think those reluctant witnesses think like that.  They didn't want to testify.  None of them were criminals.  But, saying who they were could expose them to political retribution, or loss of a job, for telling the truth about what they know.  If you want to stop witnesses from every testifying without a subpoena this is the best way to do it.  If you want to make sure you never get the whole truth from a witness, this is the best way too.  Never mind the people who get indicted, this is for the ones who testify.  These Congressmen have no appreciation for what it takes to tell all because they don't ever have to.