Trump prosecutor Jack Smith wants to use ANONYMOUS WITNESSES against trump!!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_protection



Witness protection is security provided to a threatened person providing testimonial evidence to the justice system, including defendants and other clients, before, during, and after trials, usually by police. While witnesses may only require protection until the conclusion of a trial, in particularly extreme cases, some witnesses are provided with new identities and may live out the rest of their lives under government protection. Protection is typically needed when their safety is at risk due to the potential for retaliation. The program aims to ensure their safety and encourage them to cooperate with law enforcement by providing information that can help solve cases and bring criminals to justice. It's an important tool in maintaining the integrity of the justice system and protecting those who are willing to come forward with crucial information.[1]

Witness protection is usually required in trials against organized crime, where law enforcement sees a risk for witnesses to be intimidated by colleagues of defendants. It is also used at war crime, espionage and national security issues trials.
 
In his final comments to the jury, the judge told the jury to never disclose that they were on the jury.
Why? Because Trump can convince his conditioned idiots to commit violence and the Judge knew it.

No - the judge said it to influence the jury to vote against trump. Otherwise he would have said it AFTER the verdict. Another very appealable error by this biased judge.
 
He wanted their names not to be publicly announced by the defense before they testified

And that's wrong. The prosecution is afraid if the names are published in newspapers , citizens will come forth and expose the witness as a slimeball. "Hey - i know that guy. He loves to beat his wife and kids."
 
Witnesses have been shielded and protected for decades but the bar for counsel to get that granted in a hearing is high and the context of the testimony really, REALLY matters to get this to pass.

They must establish that the person is at threat, or they may be CIA under cover agent, or a police cooperator, etc, and the hearing and judge must agree that shielding the person, but allowing the person evidence is ok and it must hold up if appealed.

Only an idiot thinks this is a Dem thing.

And Dumberthanshit checks that box.
 
Back
Top