Judge Leans Towards Redacted Affidavit, But .

WASHINGTON - Aug. 18, 2022 - PRLog -- The judge asked to unseal the affidavit supporting the search warrant for Mar-a-Lago said he is leaning towards releasing a redacted - indeed, possibly heavily redacted - version, but put off any further decision for now, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf.

While many are calling for the release of the affidavit which was submitted to support the search warrant for Donald Trump's residence in the hope that it would show whether or not the search - and possibly the tactics related to the search - were lawful, it will in no way solve the problem of having a clearly biased prosecutor, nor whether the warrant and the search tactics, even if legally supported by the affidavit, would have been employed by a prosecutor who did not have a clear conflict of interest, argues Banzhaf.

Finally, regardless of what the warrant might or might not say, it will provide no assurance,to impartial legal observer whether judgment calls such as: what further witnesses should be required to testify, whether Trump himself should be subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury and, most importantly, whether this former president under all the circumstance should be indicted and tried, even if the evidence finally developed might be legally sufficient.
Fortunately, there is a simpler solution for Garland; one which not only is possible, but is actually required by law.  The law requires that he appoint an independent special counsel to conduct investigations which "would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and that under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter."

Even belatedly appointing an independent special counsel now would go a long way towards dispelling growing distrust over the incident because he would have the power to return all or some of the documents to Trump if appropriate, to set up a fair procedure to see if any are protected by attorney-client or executive privilege, and, most importantly, to make an impartial judgment, free of conflict of interest, as to whether any documents uncovered by the search would - as a matter of judgment as well as strictly legal requirements - warrant seeking an indictment against Trump.

Moreover, suggests the law professor, appointing an independent special counsel now would help to insure far broader support and less objection to any further actions taken as part of the investigation, including but not limited to any charges, offers to plea bargain, etc. which might result from the search or otherwise.
http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf