Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Libby (Trial) Update {Juror Dismissed From Case }
NRO (The Corner) ^ | 2/26/07 | Byrion York

Posted on 02/26/2007 6:57:45 AM PST by PhatHead

Not sure what this means — but we've just gotten an announcement that the parties in the Libby trial have been asked to come to the courtroom at 9:45 this morning. Could be some sort of inquiry, or it could be bigger.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cialeak; fitzgerald; libby; plamegate; thefitzimeanfixisin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 401-408 next last
To: oceanview

I don't recall.

Judge has summoned the rest of the jury. Someone has asked for the juror to be replaced.


141 posted on 02/26/2007 8:01:01 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: NoBullZone

Walton: Don't think there is any reason to believe this jury was irresponsible — info from juror did not taint the others. They have deliberated for 2 1/2 days, don't want to throw away that work. If something does unforseeably happen to another juror then we sill have the option of recalling the alternates. I did tell them before they left they should continue to not let themselves be exposed to this case from outside sources. So rather than throw away the 2 1/2 days devoted to this effort, I will allow them to continue their deliberations.


142 posted on 02/26/2007 8:02:12 AM PST by NoBullZone (Attempting to dispel ... bull*hit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: xzins

as per a post above:

"The one juror who apparently declined to don a T-shirt was a woman who had been a curator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art."


143 posted on 02/26/2007 8:02:28 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: NoBullZone; REDWOOD99

Thanks for the explanation - I see know they are going forward with 11. I didnt realize this was an option.


144 posted on 02/26/2007 8:02:38 AM PST by gondramB (It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

Placemarker


145 posted on 02/26/2007 8:02:57 AM PST by OSHA (Sarcasm detector overload!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

How is this pertinent to today's events?


146 posted on 02/26/2007 8:05:20 AM PST by JerseyDvl (STOP - Hildabeast, Shrillary, Hitlery, Billary, Her Thighness, Sen. Cankles, Dukakis-in-Drag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: OSHA; All

well, with 11 jurors ready to go maybe they'll just say, "oh, she's gone? Then we have a verdict, your honor!"

how'd that play?


147 posted on 02/26/2007 8:05:59 AM PST by dangerfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: PhatHead
This can't be good for Libby. Fitz is going to get a scalp out of this administration and no frackin' citizen juror is going to get in his way.



Meanwhile, Richard Armitage orders another rum toddy.
148 posted on 02/26/2007 8:06:57 AM PST by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life ;o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoBullZone

The judge let the alternates go during deliberations. What's the likelihood they are not tainted, watching this on tv? Wells must not like the alternates, IMHO. Can't get a mistrial yet and doesn't want them back. The longer they stay out, the more likely they will be tainted and the trial can't finish.


149 posted on 02/26/2007 8:07:45 AM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Was she the one who didn't go along with the Valentine's day show of affection to the judge?


150 posted on 02/26/2007 8:08:32 AM PST by REDWOOD99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: gondramB; the Real fifi; Laverne; onyx; Howlin; SE Mom; Grampa Dave; samadams2000; popdonnelly; ...

Complete firedoglake blogging on this issue

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


10:45

Everyone is filing back into court — Wells, Jeffress, Fitzgerald and his poker face.

Walton in the courtroom, calls everyone to the bench.

Walton: One juror has now been dismissed based upon the knowledge of her part that she did have information based on this case. It wasn't intentional, but what she had exposure to disqualifies her from further deliberations of this case, so I need to know what counsel's position is as to how to proceed.

Wells: It is the position of defense that jury deliberation should continue with a jury of 11 and that at this juncture an alternate should not be put onto the jury, because as we understand it if a new juror is appointed they must start deliberations all over again which is something in our opinion would be prejudicial to Mr. Libby.

That would be a jury of 11. If we have a situation that for some reason another juror is lost, it is such that we would be left down to 10 and we believe your honor would have the ability to appoint the alternates in, so we're not on the "cliff of a mistrial." Don't want to throw away 2 1/2 days of deliberations when these jurors are obviously making their way through the charges, and would be highly unfair to Mr. Libby.

FitZ: The gov't would prefer 12 jurors. If you're going to replace jurors anew that it's preferable to do it after 2 1/2 days of deliberation. We think there is a preference for 12 jurors and we think there is a risk that if someone gets ill we get into dangerous territory of 11 jurors.

Walton: Don't think there is any reason to believe this jury was irresponsible — info from juror did not taint the others. They have deliberated for 2 1/2 days, don't want to throw away that work.

If something does unforseeably happen to another juror then we sill have the option of recalling the alternates. I did tell them before they left they should continue to not let themselves be exposed to this case from outside sources. So rather than throw away the 2 1/2 days devoted to this effort, I will allow them to continue their deliberations.

(jury filed back in)

Walton: The law does now allow you to continue your deliberations with 11 jururs, so that's what I'm going to do.

Let me just ask if all of you have kept yourself isolated from any information about this case — if that is so, raise your hand.

Okay, everybody raised their hand saying they have not had any outside information, and I ask that you continue to do that. It is imperative — you must decide this case based only on what you heard in this courtroom. With that I ask that you go back and proceed with your deliberations. Thank you.

(recess — 11:01 am)


151 posted on 02/26/2007 8:08:51 AM PST by STARWISE (They (Rats) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance

However, it seems, that the Defense is happy to go on with just the 11 jurors they have.


152 posted on 02/26/2007 8:09:18 AM PST by tirednvirginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: REDWOOD99

no one knows yet


153 posted on 02/26/2007 8:10:03 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: tirednvirginia

I wonder if Wells knows the score. If we could find out more about the woman dismissed, we might know.


154 posted on 02/26/2007 8:11:57 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Miss Didi
Oh, I was referring to the "real" Queen...Mrs. Pantsuit.

Remember that we have two queens now. I'd sure like to see those two fight it out to see who's the biggest dog on the block Would be fun.

From trolling the commie websites I've never seen Hitlery mentioned anywhere as a beneficiary in the left's Fitzmas fantasy.

155 posted on 02/26/2007 8:12:07 AM PST by Hillarys Gate Cult (The man who said "there's no such thing as a stupid question" has never talked to Helen Thomas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance

It probably is good for libby because Fitz wanted the juror replaced, and to go back to square 1.


156 posted on 02/26/2007 8:13:10 AM PST by hobbes1 (Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you dont have to...." ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: MaestroLC
then claiming that Jesus fathered a son by Mary Magdalen.

I saw that in a couple of books. Must be something to it if they take the time to print it...

157 posted on 02/26/2007 8:13:23 AM PST by cryptical (Wretched excess is just barely enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

The one thing about a farce, No matter when you think it's gone too wacky, it gets wackier!


158 posted on 02/26/2007 8:13:44 AM PST by AmishDude (It doesn't matter whom you vote for. It matters who takes office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

Thanks for the update, STAR.

So, what do you think??

I guess the jurors weren't asked how far along they were on their deliberations...so..we wait, I guess.


159 posted on 02/26/2007 8:13:55 AM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: PhatHead

Yes, the removed jurist is probably the one rumored to be the hold out who would hang the jury.


160 posted on 02/26/2007 8:15:00 AM PST by TennTuxedo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 401-408 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson