—PREVIOUS MESSAGE UNANSWERED.---
If a Judge dismiss my case due to taint of a Kastigar hearing, which becomes case law, without prejudice and another jurisdiction takes the case and has to conduct their own Kastigar hearing and the same type of result results (dismissal without prejudice)...Can they ring around the rosy and try as many jurisdictions that they are allowed to?
--None reasonable answer
Ok. I understand your answer. Yet, it still doesn't answer my question.
If a Federal Judge rules against the Prosecution for failing to meet the burden of proof in a Kastigar hearing and he/she dismisses the case without prejudice because the entire district that handled my case has been tainted. (1% of Judges dismiss with prejudice).
How can an entirely new jurisdiction decide to take my case and prosecute me if the simple "dye in the water" was exposed in the original Kastigar hearing. My understanding from Kastigar vs U.S. Supreme Court
is that you can not "rely on the good faith and testimony from a Prosecutor".
If you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a "wall was formed" in order to protect the testimonial immunity then you can not meet the burden.
If the Judge's rules that the CASE and not the EVIDENCE was tainted...How do you prove that all witness were not in a pool where a droplet of dye was place from the previous prosecution?