On the subject of releasing evidence. Contrary to what "SOME" say, yes the prosecutor has to release all evidence that is known to them, before they go to trial. But Grant et al seems to go to the beat of a very different drummer.

Also the phrase aid and abetting a crime seems to escape these folks. If someone doesn't report everything they know about a crime they can be convicted of aiding and abetting the criminals who committed the crime. Also slander and such things only apply when you have malice towards someone and lie about them.

here are a few rules that the court system of Washington state go by

Rules of the court Washington State.

Title 3 Advocate

RULE 3.4


A lawyer shall not:

(a) Unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to do any such act;

(b) Falsify evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law;

(c) Knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists;

(d) In pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or fail to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party;

(e) In trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, or assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness; or

(f) In trial, state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or innocence of an accused, but the lawyer may argue, on his or her analysis of the evidence, for any position or conclusion with respect to the matters stated herein.

[Effective September 1, 1985.]

RULE 3.8


The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:

(a) Refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;

(b) Make reasonable efforts to assure that the accused has been advised of the right to, and the procedure for obtaining, counsel and has been given reasonable opportunity to obtain counsel;

(c) Not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of important pretrial rights, such as the right to a preliminary hearing;

(d) Make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all unprivileged mitigating information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by a protective order of the tribunal; and

(e) Exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under rule 3.6.

[Effective September 1, 1985.]

RULE 3.6


A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding.


1. Criminal

(A) The kind of statement referred to in rule 3.6 which may potentially prejudice criminal proceedings is a statement which relates to:

(1) The character, credibility, reputation or criminal record of a suspect or defendant;

(2) The possibility of a plea of guilty to the offense or the existence or contents of a confession, admission or statement given by a suspect or defendant or that persons refusal or failure to make a statement;

(3) The performance or results of any investigative examination or test such as a polygraph examination or a laboratory test or the failure of a person to submit to an examination or test;

(4) Any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of any suspect or defendant;

(5) The credibility or anticipated testimony of a prospective witness; and

(6) Information the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is likely to be inadmissible as evidence in a trial.

(B) The public has a legitimate interest in the conduct of judicial proceedings and the administration of justice. Lawyers involved in the litigation of criminal matters may state without elaboration:

(1) The general nature of the charge or defense;

(2) The information contained in the public record; and

(3) The scheduling of any step in litigation, including a scheduled court hearing to enter a plea of guilty.

(C) The public also has a right to know about threats to its safety and measures aimed at assuring its security. Toward that end a public prosecutor or other lawyer involved in the investigation of a criminal case may state:

(1) That an investigation is in progress, including the general scope of the investigation and, except when prohibited by law, the identity of the persons involved;

(2) A request for assistance in obtaining evidence and information;

(3) A warning of danger concerning the behavior of a person involved when there is reason to believe that there exists the likelihood of substantial harm to an individual or to the public interest; and

(4) (i) The identity, residence, occupation and family status of the accused; (ii) information necessary to aid in apprehension of the accused; (iii) the fact, time and place of arrest; and (iv) the identity of investigating and arresting officers or agencies and the length of the investigation.

2. Civil

The kind of statement referred to in rule 3.6 which may potentially prejudice civil matters triable to a jury is a statement designed to influence the jury or to detract from the impartiality of the proceedings.

[Effective September 1, 1985; amended effective May 8, 1987.]

Back to evidence