In 2002 the DA brought forth a criminal case involving Armed Robbery, Burglary, & Arson charges against two men (18/20 years old).
The DA was made aware of the crimes from either a current employee or near-term former employee of his at the time.
This employee's son was equally involved in the crimes as the other two men who were arrested and charged. The son of the employee brought the information to his mother after being threatened by a third party's mother of who's son was told her of this son's bragging about the crimes.
The mother petitioned her boss (the DA) to grant full immunity to her son in exchange for his testimony to convict the other two men (her newphews).
Considering legal wording in USAM 9-23.212 and wording by the 8th Circuit Court of St. Louis that states, "It said immunity doesn't extend to the actions of a county attorney who violates a person's substantive due process rights by obtaining, manufacturing, coercing and fabricating evidence before filing formal charges, "because this is not 'a distinctly prosecutorial function."" Can it be shown that such immunization was not warranted?
The DA was made aware of the crimes from either a current employee or near-term former employee of his at the time.
This employee's son was equally involved in the crimes as the other two men who were arrested and charged. The son of the employee brought the information to his mother after being threatened by a third party's mother of who's son was told her of this son's bragging about the crimes.
The mother petitioned her boss (the DA) to grant full immunity to her son in exchange for his testimony to convict the other two men (her newphews).
Considering legal wording in USAM 9-23.212 and wording by the 8th Circuit Court of St. Louis that states, "It said immunity doesn't extend to the actions of a county attorney who violates a person's substantive due process rights by obtaining, manufacturing, coercing and fabricating evidence before filing formal charges, "because this is not 'a distinctly prosecutorial function."" Can it be shown that such immunization was not warranted?
