Posted on 03/07/2007 7:40:14 AM PST by txradioguy
NEW YORK Denis Collins, the juror in the Libby/CIA leak case who delivered a post-verdict commentary for the press, spent about a decade at The Washington Post. Today, after a night on cable TV shows, he re-appears with a massive recounting of his experience at the Huffington Post blog.
His story is billed as "INSIDE THE JURY ROOM: WHAT THE JURY THOUGHT, DAY BY DAY, WITNESS BY WITNESS, AT THE SCOOTER LIBBY TRIAL" by Denis Collins, Juror #9. It calls it "unedited" impressions, memories and facts. Other jurors' names are changed.
The New York Times today reports that he is a registered Democrat. He recalls that he revealed when considered for the jury that he had worked with Bob Woodward for three or four years and also with the Post's Walter Pincus, another witness at the trial. Until a year ago, Tim Russert was a neighbor and he even attended backyard barbeques at Russert's place. But attorneys at both tables merely offered "ain't this a small town" grins, he relates.
He adds that he went to grade school with the Times' Maureen Dowd, who allegedly had a crush on Collins' brother.
One of the lawyers asked him the subject of his 2005 book. "You wrote about the CIA?" Collins said yes, which along with his reporting connections amounted to the "perfect storm." He comments: "Yet here I am," on the CIA leak case jury.
I wasn't there, maybe you were. I don't know if Libby's attorny moved to strike this juror for cause or whether he had sufficient information at that time to prompt him to do so.
Reversed on appeal, with remand for a new trial.
Why the heck didn't they use a challenge and knock this guy off the jury? Shoot, if asked the judge might have stricken him for cause, given all the witnesses he knows.
John Grisham's "Runaway Jury"
He should not have been qualified. Period. He simply should not have been in the pool.
It's not a conspiracy and I think the Libby team figured that they'd just take one moonbat and hope for a hung jury.
Otherwise, depending on the political makeup of a city (LA, DC, Austin, San Francisco...) on political class could feel protected and get away with real crimes (OJ, Sandy Berger) while others can be "politilegally" harassed (Plamegate, Iran-Contra)
That's why Starr could never bring charges against Hillary, and why likely Sandy Berger got off easy with plea agreement - they would never be convicted by DC jury. And it's the same reason that Fitzgerald was even continuing with his "investigation" of Armitage, er, "CIA leak case" - he was DC jury-shopping, the only place where his witch hunt had a chance to be successful and thus "vindicated".
Anybody knows where Wilson's "civil lawsuit" is being heard?
We better fix this before it's being used more and more.
You can rant all you want about the way you think the system should work if you were making the rules. But under the rules that exist in Federal court, this guy was on the jury because the defense let him be on the jury. End of story.
It would be sweet if the conviction gets thrown out because of the bias/conflict-of-intrest of this left-wing A-hole juror.
If there were a contest between Denis Collins and Joe Wilson as to who was the bigger publicity hound and suck-up to the leftist netroots who would win?
I used to think there were people on this forum who knew less then you do about our judicial system. I don't think that anymore.
This spokesman for the jury could be used, among other issues, as prima facie argument that Libby couldn't get a fair trial in DC - politically tainted jury, not "jury of one's peers".
No, but the defense could almost certainly eliminate everyone who worked for multiple witnesses in the case and was neighbors with another - without using a single peremptory strike.
And if you are actually asking a question, instead of being a dumbass, the answer is that Russert won't be indicted for anything. I'll bet you anything you are willing to wager I'm correct about that.
If I remember correctly, Pincus was called as a defense witness to discredit Ari Fliescher -- so they would have seen his knowing Pincus as a good thing, not a bad thing.
Still, it seems odd not to object to this guy.
And the judge won't get upset, eh? Won't get frustrated? Won't take it out on the defense?
Russert won't be indicted for anything.
Damn right. But (and remember that you passed judgment on Libby before the jury came in) did he or did he not perjur himself on the stand, given that he is a member of the bar in the District of Columbia?
They could not find an impartial jury that didn't hate President Bush or the Battle in Iraq in the WOT. This buffoon appears to have been upfront with both sides and said he could be impartial.
Risky true, but the whole jury selection and fair trial was a crapshoot in this case in DC.
Not political belief system, but rather party affiliation - there is a difference.
Nice try to provoke me again. I'll let you have the last word on this subject.
You would get someone just as politically committed, but without potential for being an "appeals material". This guy should talk more and louder. He should be better known than Anna Nicole Smith.
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.