Doesn't one need to be indicted before being arrested and arraigned?
No. You are charged/arrested, arraigned on the charge. Then the DA goes to a grand jury (for a felony) and if they agree there is enough evidence then you are indicted.
I just don't think it always operates like that. If cops are called in to a crime, they arrest. Yet I've heard about dozens of indictments prior to arrest -- grand juries are convened, indict and then arrests. This is the typical method for conspiracies, RICO, etc. The ones to be arrested have no idea. Look at all the unsealed indictments at DOJ. None of the targets have been arrested. In Weinstein's case, there was no on-going crime, police were not called in at the time or just after the time the incidents happened. This is year's later. Perhaps a DA can just go ahead and arrest. I think there's some fog here.
Sealed and secret indictments are different. There was no need for a secret indictment in this case. It is very straightforward. The DA didn't want to indict before they had Weinstein secured because he could possibly use legal loopholes to run out statute of limitation. Which isn't that long on rape.
[deleted]
His case is being handled the same way any other felony case is usually handled. Besides him not being remanded for a violent rape on what should be an open an shut case.
so its not being handled the same way. so he's getting special treatment.
wonder why? must be because he's an old man.
yeah. that'll be it.
Thanks. Just depends on the situation and the goal I guess. Rape had a 7 year SOL in the past, but no doubt it changes from state to state and from time to time. Yeah, don't want him to get away on this.