Posted on 03/02/2007 10:01:36 AM PST by STARWISE
By Jeralyn, Section Lewis Libby Trial Coverage
Posted on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 07:21:00 AM EST
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:
`So I assume they will not have a verdict tomorrow either,'' Walton told lawyers as jurors finished their seventh day of deliberations.
Before bringing the jurors into court, Walton advised lawyers they ``will not be happy about coming into court because they don't think they are dressed appropriately.''
He said that's why they decided not to come into court Monday for a brief discussion and how ``I knew there wasn't a verdict'' coming Thursday. About half were wearing blue jeans, but most smiled broadly when Walton granted their request to leave early Friday.
The Judge denied a request for a dictionary:
Walton said he denied the dictionary request - not an uncommon one for juries - because definitions of common words can have legal implications. He told jurors if they had questions, they could ask him directly.
(Excerpt) Read more at talkleft.com ...
Prayers for relief and justice for Scooter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scooter ~~ likely no verdict today PING!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FYI: I'm not able to access any central content on
http://www.firedoglake.com
I just get the header and side data .. the center is blank.
Would one of you please try it and let me know what you get? Thanks.
All I got was the same thing that you did.
I don't know how you can read that site. It is so full of partisan hate that it is actually worthless.
That said, my feeling, and yes I said "feeling", not thought, on the jury, is that the jury is very busy trying to justify a guilty verdict, because the facts of the case don't simply prove the prosecutor's case. My guess is that the former WA Post reporter is trying to walk the rest of the jury through the leftist metanarrative that Fitzgerald tried to contruct about the evil Bush administration. It is a slow tortured process.
Thanks.
How? Simple ~~~ their live blogging of the trial from the courtroom.
But their perceptions are all colored by their partisanship. For instance, they report that Fitzgerald is ebullient, and Wells is tired, when NRO reports the opposite.
No Friday verdict?
When there are ongoing proceedings, I go to all the sites covering this trial. So far, firedoglake has been the most current with actual events.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1793292/posts
I don't see anything on NRO about this today, except for
Podhoretz's blurb about the movie deal.
Doesn't look like it .. and the jurors leave for the weekend in a half hour.
You're right, there was nothing today, but there was really nothing to report, except that the jury was dressed in jeans, and had asked for an early dismissal.
She left to go home.
More inane, sputtering speculation ~~ pretty sure there will be no verdict today. Jurors are supposedly released for the weekend in a little less than a half hour from now.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.firedoglake.com/
Post-Its, And Other Musings
By Christy Hardin Smith @ 9:15 am
So, here we all sit. Waiting for the jury. Wondering what is going on with deliberations. Wondering when we'll get a verdict. Wondering whether we'll get a verdict any time soon. Trying to be patient. Yep. Yepppers…
ARRRRGH!
Ahem. Okay, so honestly, I've waited for a lot of juries — and the legal beagles in the audience can back me up on this: they finish deliberations on their own speed, and it's best to busy yourself with other things while you are waiting. Otherwise, you drive yourself crazy with all the "what ifs."
Sure, we've heard all about the multiple notes requesting post-its and flip charts and pens and all. I have to say, I agree with Jane's theory:
…the thing that was happening to the jury is what happened to people on the blogs who got into this story — they got addicted to it. They're busy sorting through the details, peeling back layers of the onion, fascinated by the process of mutual discovery as they explore the characters and events that led up to the trial. Pach said in his shrinky expert opinion that this made a lot of sense.
Of course, with the following caveat, which is that you never know what is going on inside the jury room and, more often than not, whatever you are thinking ends up being completely wrong or completely right — but for different reasons altogether than you could ever have imagined.
(snip)
And I can certainly see the jury getting to that point as well, especially if this is their first real exposure to anything involved in this case.
Just the court intrigue alone within the Bush Administration itself — the WH versus the Veep's office versus…well, you get the idea.
(snip)
Or maybe they are just meticulously going through every piece of evidence and doing their duty to ensure that a just verdict is rendered under the law.
In other words, trying to second guess the jury always ends up getting you stressed out, for no particular reason. So, I'm trying to take the zen approach and say to myself that the jury will finish when they finish, and that is the end of that.
Having tracked the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) arguments on varous sites during the last few weeks, I have to say that I am deeply unimpressed with the left's inability to amass a coherent argument. One easy illustration is to look at the one star reviews for any of the skeptical AGW books. Firedoglake comments are, for the most part, of the same ill-informed ilk.
http://www.firedoglake.com/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spy
By Jane Hamsher @ 10:48 am
*UPDATE* — okay, that's it for the day. It's 2pm, the jury has left the building and we have no verdict yet. We'll see you all back here bright and early on Monday morning for another week of live blogging from the Prettyman Courthouse — JH
We thought we might have a hearing on the meaning of whatever word the jury wanted a dictionary for today, but so far — nada.
Still, in Marcy's absence it's been nice to have egregious here in the media room as backup in case I needed to be up in the courtroom (everyone knows how much I love sitting on those rock-hard benches).
We've got about 45 minutes until the end of the day (jury goes home at 2pm) so we're in countdown phase for the weekend until then.
Meanwhile, via Jeralyn at TalkLeft, we find that the Wilsons have sold their story to Warner Brother. The sport du jour here at the courthouse is casting.
Matt Cooper has already publicy said that he wants Jack Black to play him (who would no doubt pick up an Oscar for the "sprawl" scene). Feel free to play blogospheric casting director in the comments below — who knows, someone Debra Zane could be picking up tips.
Rrom comments on another thread:
As Pach and I were heading to the elevators, I told him that I suspected that the thing that was happening to the jury is what happened to people on the blogs who got into this story — they got addicted to it.
They're busy sorting through the details, peeling back layers of the onion, fascinated by the process of mutual discovery as they explore the characters and events that led up to the trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Bush haters are busy peeling off the layers of an onion and when they are done they will have a peeled onion
I want that verdict to come back SO not guilty, especially after hearing about that stupid movie.
There are two new notes from the jury.As count 1 statement 3 (pages 63 & 64) do not contain quotes, are we supposed to evaluate the entire Libby transcripts (testimony) or would the court direct us to specific pages/lines
We would like clarification of the term "reasonable doubt". Specifically, is it necessary for the government to present evidence that it is not humanly possible for someone not to recall an event in order to find guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.