Re: **** tha police

Charles Bishop <ctbishop@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> I had a different take on it. The cops wanted to get in testimony that
> there was much confusion and they couldn't be blamed if something went
> wrong. Using the GJ testimony let them do this. If the prosecutor hadn't
> used/allowed this, then either they would have to testify, or they
> wouldn't have the benefit of the "it was so confusing" testimony. They
may
> or may not have testified in that case, but the case against them would
> have been stronger.

Didn't the *prosecution* introduce the GJ testimony?  It sounds like
the testimony had information *they* wanted introduced that the 
officers refused to testify to. 


-- 
-------Patrick M Geahan----pmgeahan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"You know, this is how the sum total of human knowledge is increased. 
Not with idle speculation and meaningless chatter, but with a 
medium-sized hammer and some free time." - spam.sc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 a.f.c-a