Regarding Sealed Indictments: If Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of

[BlueStateBlue]

Criminal Procedure state that a sealed indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial, they must be used in instances other than when the target must be arrested by surprise.

What is the advantage of having a sealed indictment in a case where the indicted party has been processed and released on bail? Is the advantage to the prosecutor? Or to the defendant?

Let's assume for a moment that there is a sealed indictment on Rove... could he have bargained for it this way? Why?

[Kagemusha]

1. Take a mafiosi who turns state evidence.

If the indictment was public then the indictment being dropped later, also public, would be seen as a sure sign of the mafiosi being flipped. So, not making the indictment public and using it as pressure (to further the cause of justice, and completely subject to judicial review) favors the prosecutor.

In that case.

[BlueStateBlue]

2. That makes perfect sense. And I think it fits in this scenario, too.

[hang a left]

6. Do you know where to find information about this procedure?

Where an idictment is sealed for another reason other than not to alert the defendant? Thanks.

[Jersey Devil]

11. It is done often in Mafia conspiracy cases

In a conspiracy case it is necessary to spell out the facts of the conspiracy and then it becomes obvious what the prosecutor knows or doesn't know in addition to who is cooperating and who isn't.

Let's say that there is a sealed indictment for a mafia conspiracy but at the time of the indictment the prosecutor is still tracking down proof of who "Mafia don A" is and and gathering proof against him although the prosecutor already has sufficient proof to indict against others in the conspiracy. He wouldn't want to tip off those still under investigation of who or what he was looking at and give them a chance to cover up or destroy evidence so the prosecutor would ask that the indictment be sealed until his investigation was completed.

That could also be the reason for the mysterious "motions" that were filed with the indictment of Libby because to get an indictment sealed you would have to make an application (or "motion") to a judge. A prosecutor cannot seal an indictment - only a judge can do that.

[No Exit]

3. If it's sealed, I don't think even Rove would necessarily know about it

But suppose, as you posited, that he did know, and that he had actually asked that it be sealed. Why? Because if Karl's indicted, * pretty much has to fire him immediately. That * thinks so is shown by his quick firing of Libby as soon as Libby was indicted.

Karl might hope that the indictment be sealed because he wants to stay at his job for a while.

[Richard Steele]

4. Not to nitpick, but * didn't fire Libby, he allowed him to resign. eom

[No Exit]

12. Good point: yes, * is THAT unrepentant! Didn't even fire the guy.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

8. Shrub Couldn't Even Fire Brownie......

There ain't no way he fires rover, even if he gets indicted. My guess is that he's in deep trouble by going that route, if and when rover gets charges filed against him.

[Jersey Devil]

10. If it is sealed Fitz could not even tell Rove's lawyer about it

They couldn't have reached an agreement for a sealed indictment. At the most the agreement could have provided that if Rove cooperates he would not be prosecuted for any crimes or that he would, at some time in the future, be permitted to plead to specific charges and/or with a certain recommended sentence.

But a "I'll seal the indictment if Rove cooperates" deal would not be permitted and you just know that Fitz would never violate GJ secrecy rules.

[No Exit]

13. Okay, well,then we know that if there IS a sealed indictment

of Rove, then Rove "officially" doesn't know about it, so therefore he could have had no hand in asking that it be sealed.

(Of course, Rove's lawyer has informed him of the possibility that he may have been indicted, I'm sure.)

So, back to wondering what it was the GJ had attached to Scooty-boot's indictments last Friday...

[Jersey Devil]

14. Unless it was a motion to seal an indictment

I cannot for the life of me figure out what it could possibly have been. I am a lawyer and a former prosecutor and can't think of a single reason why a motion would be filed with an indictment other than to seal another indictment.

[Norquist Nemesis]

15. Is it the GJ that decides on sealing?

I'm not a lawyer, so I really appreciate your insight and knowledge on the procedures. Does a jury make a motion to seal indictments or is it at the prosecutors discretion?

[Jersey Devil]

16. The prosecutor brings the motion on behalf of the United States

government, which is a "party" to the case once an indictment is returned by a Grand Jury.

Only a judge (federal magistrate = judge) can order an indictment sealed. A prosecutor an ask that an indictment be sealed, but he cannot do with without a judge's approval, which would be sought from a judge in a Notice of Motion to be filed with the judge stating the reasons why the Prosecutor is asking that the indictment be sealed and asking the court to issue an Order sealing it.

GJ has no power to seal an indictment. Their only power is to indict or not indict.

[Norquist Nemesis]

17. Thanks!

<taking notes on procedures for future reference>

[seabeyond]

5. i could see them sealing it to hold over him for him to comply to

an agreement he has made
just a thought

[Quixote1818]

7. How often are sealed indictments made? Are they common? nt

[Gin]

9. I love the heavy cloud hanging over Rove's head........bring on the

kidney stones...may he experience pain in relation to the pain he has caused.

It's Universal Law.