General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCan someone explain the point of an "unindicted co-conspirator"
Why not just indict him?
mucifer
(23,569 posts)Supreme Court is ruling this by refusing to hear it until the last minute. So Arizona is probably waiting to hear the results on that which they dont have to make until effing JUNE.
claudette
(3,598 posts)that the investigation is still on-going and the the co-conspirator might be indicted with more evidence. I'm not sure.
lastlib
(23,288 posts)An unindicted co-conspirator might be helping the prosecution, in exchange for not facing criminal liability.
claudette
(3,598 posts)But, I can't imagine Dumpy helping the prosecution!
lastlib
(23,288 posts)(For one, he's giving them job security....)
He let himself be recorded by Raffensberger, basically making the case for fraud. And he has pretty much confessed in the documents case. He preens around, says he did everything he's charged with, and says it wasn't a crime; he's effing around, he's gonna find out--eventually--that it was.
werdna
(496 posts)- "Five others were named as unindicted co-conspirators. The designation means these five were believed to be involved in plans to present an alternate slate of presidential electors, but were not charged with a crime for their activities."
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/25/arizona-fake-electors-unindicted-co-conspirators/73419445007/
dsc
(52,166 posts)in Nixon's case they felt he couldn't be indicted as a sitting President. In Trump's they may wish to avoid the delays. Some of the unindicted may be cooperating.