[USS Alaska]

You can bet that with this POS in the jury room, no matter what the rest of the idiots first thought, he was going to stay there until they got a conviction. 12 angry men in reverse. He was one of the better educated, knew the witnesses, wrote about the CIA and had to be viewed by the jury as an "expert". Libby's lawyers were a bunch of dopes.

[freespirited]

Libby's lawyers were a bunch of dopes.

Weren't there jury consultants on this case? What were they thinking?

Unbelievable.

[Suzy Quzy]

Amen...why is he the only juror out speaking?? Where are the PTHERS??? Where is the one who got let go??

Wells is an INCOMPETENT BOOB!!!

[VOA]

He was one of the better educated, knew the witnesses, wrote about the
CIA and had to be viewed by the jury as an "expert". Libby's lawyers
were a bunch of dopes.

Amen to that.
I've known some professors (in the biological sciences) in the Los
Angeles area; they are about the first folks that get booted for
jury duty if there is any sort of forensic/DNA evidence involved in
a case.

Don't want someone on the jury confusing fellow jurors with facts,
don't you know.
Some poor murdering SOB might actually get convicted. And the
general zeitgeist is not to do that in Los Angeles.
It might hurt the murderer's feelings.
(/sarc)

And, in fairness, I think these professors have also been rejected
occassionally by the prosecution. I suspect this may happen when
the forensic evidence is weak or perhaps mitigating or potentially
exculpatory (depending on one's knowledge or point of view).

[dforest]

From what I heard, they ran out of disqualifications. You have only so many times you can say no. When you run out, you are stuck. They had to turn down so many, they ran out when this guy came up. No surprise to me. Just keep throwing lib after lib and all you can do is end up with libs. Sounds fair, huh?