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.
More interesting tidbits from the Corner:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/
Re: Libby Update 4 [Andy McCarthy]
Apropos Byron's succeeding post: also very interesting. The government is virtually always very happy to go with 11 jurors rather than 12. Eleven are easier to convince; plus, anything new you add to the deliberation mix is destabilizing, and the government generally wants stability and good order, not chaos.
Thus, the fact that Pat Fitzgerald would rather add a juror than go with 11 is puzzling. Either there must be something about the first alternate that the government thinks would be unusually good for the prosecution, or there is some strange jury dynamic afoot — which would be impossible to assess without being in the courtroom and getting a look at what's going on in there.
There are days when I wish I could type , spell, or maybe both
Why would the t-shirt have anything to do with her dismissal?
Heads will explode over there if when there is no conviction.
so the only juror who would not wear the shirt, is the "tainted" one?
really.
>>so the only juror who would not wear the shirt, is the "tainted" one?
really.<<
I might not want to a valentine Tee shirt either...
I love how Victoria Toensing who helped write the law the left is using to go after Libby et al, is now considered their "bad guy"
Probably someone to keep up with the news.
Probably a pre-requisite at MOMA to be an emotional bush-hating leftist.
Fascination. I think it's safe to say that someone who works at a museum, especiallt the Met would be a liberal, and not Libby-friendly. I have met very few Conservatives in the museum world, and the ones I have met are in Business Affairs rather than Curatorial. There are of course exceptions to every rule.
I will say, that however it turns out - the t'shirt stunt was out of place.
What's her name, and does she show up on a political donor list.
I'm thinking that on average an art historian would be a liberal. That's where I'd place my bet.
If that's true and she's gone...Libby is acquitted today.
Fascinating. I think it's safe to say that someone who works at a museum, especially the Met would be a liberal, and not Libby-friendly. I have met very few Conservatives in the museum world, and the ones I have met are in Business Affairs rather than Curatorial. There are of course exceptions to every rule.
Need more coffee. :)
All that I'm saying about the shirt is that she doesn't get along with the rest. I'm not saying it's a cause, although I can't help thinking that if she were really annoying that a smart jury member would make sure she could be exposed to outside media and it would be provable.
Agreed. I'm taking this as a good sign.
absolutely, no matter how I felt about the case - as a juror, I would not engage in some stunt like that. just go into deliberations and vote.
>>I love how Victoria Toensing who helped write the law the left is using to go after Libby et al, is now considered their "bad guy"<<
Is it a new law? I would have there would have been a law about not lying to a grand jury more or less forever.
This can mean that the defense is confident that the jury will either acquit or be hung.
You can lie to a grand jury all you want. It has to be "material". If no law was broken, nothing can be material.
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.