Yes. That's a problem for the DEA when you're talking about a small business in California because of jurisdictional dick waving contests but less of a problem when they walk into DC under the presumption that the Republicans haven't completely lost it.

My apologies. It's a legal tactic used by defense lawyers. Upon initial questioning, rather than asking to see the evidence, this is their question. I believe asking to see the evidence could be construed as insinuation of guilt, at least in my area, as told to me by a defense attorney for someone else.

Maybe that's changed? Maybe a criminal defense attorney could speak to this?

Yeah, from what I know about the rank-and-file in these cases, they're till pretty legit. They don't even seek an indictment unless it's a slam-dunk. But with this administration in charge, you never know.

If she's exonerated, it shouldn't cause financial/employment ruin, but psychological distress for which she will be well compensated. I suppose that could lead to financial/vocational ruin, in which case she and future generations should be well-compensated (e.g., inheritance).