OK tell me this question about the grand jury.

[Justice Is Comin]

As the good Cajun people would say.

Why are witnesses allowed to discuss their own testimony given to the grand jury? You would think there would be a gag order so strict it would give you chills to think about it. Has anyone thought about that?

Grand juries are supposed to be secret, but yet if every witness in this case came out (like Miller) and said what they were asked and what their reply was, we might as well have the grand jury on C-Span.

It doesn't make any sense.

[Maddy McCall]

1. Fitzgerald did not ask the judge to issue gag orders to the witnesses.

They are allowed to publicly discuss their testimony. However, the jurors are not allowed to publicly discuss the case.

[Justice Is Comin]

3. I know but that undermines the entire secrecy of what a grand jury is

supposed to be. How can a proceeding be secret if you can tell what went on in the proceeding? It tips the hand to target's attorneys, to prospective witnesses. It doesn't make any sense.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. Deliberations, questions, & the prosecutor's remarks & advice all secret.

[punpirate]

2. Witnesses are free to speak if they wish...

... unless otherwise instructed by the judge overseeing the grand jury. The grand jurors themselves are bound to secrecy until the term of their service is over.

That's the way it works. Some witnesses will speak, some will not. Those who do speak (such as Miller) may have their own agenda about speaking of their experience. That doesn't change what they were asked and what they said during grand jury testimony.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. Suppose that ...

Suppose that a Republican said that your Cajun cooking was poisoning your restaurant's customers. Then a grand jury investigating the Republican for treason called you and asked you about his remarks and if there was any truth to it, etc. If you were prevented from talking about the issue, then you'd be unable to defend yourself in public.

OK, so perhaps some would draw a distinction between the exact remarks to the grand jury and other remarks. How is that going to be enforced? By a public trial for contempt? Then the remarks come out anyway.

Basically, any prohibition against talking about what one says to a grand jury tends to be unworkable and thus it is wisely not a requirement.

[Justice Is Comin]

6. I'm just making an observation my friend.

It seems counter productive. If you want your kids to be surprised at Christmas, you don't tell them what you're getting them. After Christmas, it doesn't matter anymore.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. No problem.

In your original post which I was responding to, you said it made no sense. I was just trying to help make it make sense. If I failed, I apologize.