I found this in an article: "During trial, Deputy District Attorney William Brown said [Miriam] Carre 'had no idea, absolutely no idea' about the plans to kill."
But Mimi definitely knew the plans to kill. The probate petition clearly cites evidence from the record that Sanford texted Mimi "It's cool because they gon die" in response to her texted complaints to him about her parents.
So she knew it was going to happen, but perhaps she didn't know which night it was going to happen? If so, what a coincidence that she was so concerned on the night of the murders that Sanford was using her family's van, that she texted him and asked him to bring it back and use a different car.
Did this Deputy DA simply fail to review this evidence? Or was Mimi just such a great actress that he chose to believe her despite the evidence she was lying?
Also, even if the Deputy DA thought she didn't know Sanford would shoot them during the robbery, why did the Deputy DA just let her off the hook for planning the robbery of "bands of cash" in the first place, and for lying to police the next day by falsely claiming both Sanford and the van were at home with her all night? Why does she just get away with those crimes?
Once Sanford is sentenced and any hope for an appeal of his conviction is gone, he just might start talking about what Mimi knew. He can't talk about that until then because discussing her involvement would be an admission of his own guilt.
There might be some risk that she might actually flee the country if the evidence in the probate petition (which shows she knew the plan to kill) nullifies her immunity and makes her eligible for criminal charges. She's presumably been living on her parents' money for the past two years, and depending on how much of their cash she can access right now, she could make a run for it, especially if the family is successful in its bid to strip her inheritance. Might be wise to freeze her passport!