Tag: Libby Trial (page 6)

Bump and Update: Via DOJ spokesperson Randall Samborn:

The Libby jury delivered two notes containing questions when they were excused today. Both notes will be available on the public docket later today. Court will convene at 9 a.m. on Monday March 5 to address the notes.

Update: No verdict today.

*********

Libby Trial: Verdict Unlikely Today

A verdict is unlikely today in the Scooter Libby trial. The jurors' note (pdf) yesterday said they wanted to be excused at 2:00 pm to attend to "personal, professional and medical obligations," and the Judge granted it.

The judge thinks they will deliberate into next week. And yes, it appears they care about being dressed appropriately when the verdict is returned:

Update: Keep reading the tea leaves. No verdict today and the jury is leaving early tomorrow. Marcy at Firedoglake has the recap.

********

We're in day seven of the Scooter Libby jury deliberations. Jane and Marcy of Firedoglake are live-blogging any news.

Tidbit for today: The jurors asked for another large easel pad yesterday, signifying nothing. Maybe more important - the jurors are in jeans again.

I think the jurors will dress up on verdict day. I have no scientific or anecdotal evidence to back that up, only a memory that it happened in some other high-profile trial within the past few years. I can't even remember now which one.

Please use the comments to update with trial news as I'll be off-line for several hours (although checking in every ten minutes by Treo.) I'll have my laptop with me to get back online if there's a verdict. Feel free to e-mail me if you learn it before reading it here.

Bump and Update: Per Firedoglake, no verdict today, the jury has gone home.

*******

Libby: Factors to Consider While We Wait

While predicting what a jury will do -- or even where they are in their deliberations -- is fruitless, there are some things to consider in trying to follow along. The first is that we have access to newspaper articles, blog posts, pleadings, etc. They do not.

They do not have transcripts of the trial testimony or opening or closing arguments. They do not even have a copy of the Indictment.

They have jury instructions. They have paper copies of the exhibits. They have their handwritten notes of the testimony.

So, where would they begin once they have selected a foreman and decided to start discussions? Byron York says how he would do it.

More...

There was much waiting this morning as the Court decided how to respond to yesterday's jury note.

Here is yesterday's note. It was a question about what was required on Count 3 of the Indictment, pertaining to former Time reporter Matthew Cooper. The count alleges Libby made a false statement to the FBI about his conversation with Cooper in the fall of 2003. This is not the perjury count.

Update: Jane of Firedoglake reprints the text version:

We would like clarification on the charge as stated under Count 3 specifically:

Page 74 of the jury instructions, "Count three of the indictment alleges that Mr. Libby falsely told the FBI on October 14 or November 26, 2003, that during a conversation with M. Cooper of Time Magazine on July 12, 2003, Mr. Libby told Mr. Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson's wife worked for the CIA but that Mr. Libby did not know of this was true.

(i.e., is the charge that the statement was made or about the content of the statement itself)

Judge's note at the bottom — I am not exactly certain what you are asking me. Can you please clarify your question?

After the Judge responded, the jury sent back this note, indicating it now understood what it was supposed to do.

Firedoglake is live-blogging deliberations again. I agree with Marcy that the Cooper counts are the weakest in the Indictment.

Update: The jury had a note at end of the day. Received by e-mail from DOJ spokesperson Randall Samborn:

The Court received a note containing a question from the jury at the end of the day today. Judge Walton will address the note with the parties in court at approximately 9:30 a.m. Wednesday morning, following the conclusion of another matter the Court has scheduled at 9 a.m. The contents of the note will not be disclosed until the note is addressed in court and docketed sometime tomorrow morning.

Update: 5:05 pm ET and no verdict. Looks like everyone comes back for more waiting tomorrow.

********

The 11 remaining jurors are in day 5 of jury deliberations in the Scooter Libby trial. Jane and Marcy of Firedoglake are at the courthouse, as is Aldon Haynes of Orient Lodge (blogging for MediaBloggers.

Lots of people have asked me what's taking so long. I don't think this is a particularly long time yet.

Here are the first two notes sent by the jury in the Scooter Libby trial:

• Note 1

• Note 2

Update: Jury's done for the day.

Marcy (Empty Wheel)was in the media room and courtroom today live-blogging at Firedoglake and watching the jury and lawyers.

I just received this email from DOJ spokesman Randall Samborn:

Mr. Fitzgerald will not be available after a verdict for one-on-one interviews or talk shows. We do anticipate that he will speak to the media after a verdict outside the Courthouse.

My main question which I hope a reporter asks: Is this investigation over? I sure hope the answer is "no."

Due to the length of Scooter's grand jury testimony and the voluminous exhibits introduced, I would not be surprised if this jury doesn't come back before Friday. I'm not going to make a prediction for conviction or acquittal. But, I do think a very fast verdict means acquittal and a very prolonged one means a split (compromise) verdict or a hung jury.

I'm so conflicted.

I believe that the Office of the Vice President, particularly Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby, went all out to attack Joseph Wilson after his July 6th New York Times Op-ed criticizing the intelligence relied on by the Administration to justify its decision to go to war in Iraq.

I believe the evidence at Scooter Libby's trial established that Cheney was livid over Wilson and that he used the C.I.A., the State Department and the Department of Defense to search for dirt on him. Through his inquiries, Cheney learned that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, worked for the CIA in the counter-proliferation division on weapons of mass destruction. He received information that she might have had a role in sending Wilson to Niger to check on intelligence claims that Iraq was acquiring uranium for use in WMD's.

More...

I'm live blogging the Scooter Libby closings at Huffington Post.

• Government
• Defense

Also check out Marcy at Firedoglake.

Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake, Marcy Wheeler of The Next Hurrah who has been live-blogging this week at Firedoglake and I discuss the day in court and whether Fitz proved his case or Wells succeeded with his defense strategy.

I had a great week covering the trial for Huffington Post and I'll be flying home to Denver and my day job in the morning. I'll fly back to DC Monday to live blog closing arguments on Tuesday.

This has been one of the best blogging experiences yet. Why? Because bloggers bond. As you can probably tell from the week of Politics TV videos, Jane Hamsher, Marcy Wheeler and I got along famously. We don't compete, we complement and support each other and we share our knowledge. It's all about adding another dimension to the reporting.

Firedoglake has made an amazing contribution to the Libby trial reporting, as the New York Times documents today.

[Cross Posted at Huffington Post]

The Libby trial is going out with a whimper. PlameGate followers, like Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake, feel cheated. Without testimony from Vice President Cheney or Scooter Libby, there's no bang for the buck.

"When Ted Wells came back from lunch today and announced that he had released Dick Cheney as a witness I was damn near brokenhearted. After all that, and Shooter lets me down. Did he not want to testify on Libby's behalf, did Team Libby decide he could do more harm than good, or did they never intend to call him at all? We'll probably never know."

For those who believe criminal trials should be a search for the truth, I sympathize. But that's not the purpose of a criminal trial. A criminal trial is simply a testing of the evidence. The only issue is whether the prosecution can prove its charges (pdf) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Scooter Libby is not required to prove he didn't lie or obstruct justice. All he has to do is raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of the jurors that he did.

The test for reasonable doubt is not a simple weighing of the evidence, after which the jury decides which side to believe more. That's the test in a civil case where the standard of proof is a mere "preponderance of the evidence."

In layman's terms, in a criminal case, if both sides' theories and arguments sound plausible, that alone is a reasonable doubt and the jury should acquit.

Wow. Ted Wells just announced neither Libby nor Cheney will testify. Evidence ends tomorrow, closings next Tuesday. More at Huffington Post.