There has been some kinda crazy talk floating around the MSM that State Department investigators somehow conferred immunity on Blackwater mercenaries in the course of questioning them. Without commenting on whether or not the word "immunity" was ever used in any conversation let me tell you that as a matter of law, it would be impossible for that to be true.

You see for statutory immunity to be conferred---YOU NEED A COURT ORDER. Immunity is not some causal thing that you can accidentally or carelessly sprinkle about like pocket lint. It is the result of a formal application by a lawyer for the government that strips a person of their right to refuse to answer questions and compels their testimony, but because of the 5th Amendment right not to self incriminate, prohibits the use of that testimony against the compelled witness.

This is legal process folks. You go to court for this. It isn't a "well maybe I did, maybe I didn't," or a "whoops, I did it again" kind of thing. If someone has statutory immunity, we would all know it, because there would be a court order downloadable from the PACER system (that's the federal court's electronic docket and document management system---you know, where we got all the Plame filings?)

Oh and State couldn't get such an order (not that anyone is contending they did) without Main Justice knowing about it because in order to apply for such an order a government attorney has to get approval from the Assistant Attorney General who deal with their agency:

The Attorney General has designated the Assistant Attorneys General and Deputy Assistant Attorneys General of the Criminal, Antitrust, Civil, Civil Rights, Environmental and Natural Resources, and Tax Divisions to review (and approve or deny) requests for immunity (viz., authorization to seek compulsion orders) in matters assigned to their respective divisions (28 C.F.R. Sec. 0.175), although this approval is still subject to Criminal Division clearance. This authority extends to requests for immunity from administrative agencies under 18 U.S.C. § 6004

Id.

There are even forms to fill out and everything.

Now, there is another type of immunity, which isn't a true immunity at all and is actually a contract between the witness and the government. It is sometimes called "pocket immunity" or "letter immunity" and its variants can include the extremely limited proffer agreement known as a "queen for a day" letter. The testimony given in this context is voluntary and is usually had in connection with a plea agreement or a deferred prosecution agreement.

These are both extensively negotiated and highly formal documents. If any Blackwater criminal suspect had one of these documents, his defense lawyer would certainly know it, having spent many hours working on the draft documents, and have a copy of it to show to reporters.  Again, there would not be any confusion in the minds of agents, prosecutors, or defense counsel. There would be a document.

The ONLY POSSIBLE THEORY I can possibly come up with about why there would be ANY confusion about the prosecution status of the Blackwater shooters, would be if the investigators from the State Department either didn't give the defendants the proper warnings or gave the wrong warning:

Kalkines warnings are given when the possibility of criminal prosecution has been removed, usually by a declination to prosecute by the DOJ, and the employee is required to answer questions relating to the performance of his or her official duties or be subject to disciplinary action.

Id.

Clearly, the DOJ had not yet declined prosecution, I cannot conceive of any circumstance involving loss of life via gunfire, why an agent would give a Kalines warning rather than a Garrity or Miranda warning.

Nonetheless, this is not the same as or even a kissing cousin of "immunity." So somebody has been disseminating disinformation to the MAS. I wonder why?

Something else I wonder about? Why Blackwater was illegally exporting gun silencers without a State Department permit?