I have tried to think how I would go through the charges, were I on the jury. Counts 2 and 4 are Russert Counts, while Counts 3 and 5 are Cooper Counts, and Count 1 is the omnibus obstruction of justice count. So it would make sense to consider the counts from 2 to 4 to 3 to 5 to 1.
Here's what makes sense to me -- After a perusal of count 1, they move on to Counts 4 and 5, back to count 1, then on to counts 2 and 3. My reasoning:
After the general instructions (which include the presumption of innocence, reasonable doubt and a memory instruction), the instructions move to the substantive counts against Libby.
The first is on Count 1 of the Indictment, Obstruction of Justice. But, in order to resolve that count, they must first decide whether any of three specific statements (pdf) Libby made to the grand jury in March, 2004 about his conversations with Tim Russert and Matthew Cooper in July, 2003 were falsely made with the intent of deceiving the grand jury.
The obstruction count does not pertain to Libby's allegely false statements to investigators in the fall of 2003. The statements are taken from testimony contained in Counts 4 and 5, the perjury counts.
Admittedly I'm a lawyer and not a juror, but I would think the jury would first decide counts 4 and 5, and then go back to count 1, since in order to decide count 1, the obstruction charge, they first need to resolve whether he testified falsely to the grand jury about Russert and Cooper. After they finished with those, I would think they would move on to Counts 2 and 3, the false statements charges. Taking them in order (count 2 being Russert and Count 3 being Cooper), I would think they would have resolved Russert before Cooper.
If that's the case, then yesterday's question about Count 3 could mean they are at the end of the process, with them having resolved all but Count 3.
If this is right, they should be almost done.
Of course, they also could have just deferred considering Count 1 to first go through 2,3, 4 and 5 in order. In which case, they are probably not near completion.
As Byron says, we really don't have a clue.
As an aside, one of the most fascinating aspects of the trial to me is how they will resolve the memory issue. Here is the memory instruction the jury was to receive from Judge Walton. Keep in mind that he may have changed a few words when he delivered it and the transcript of the reading of the charge, not this document, is the official version.
I still think the jury could come back with a complete acquittal, a conviction on all counts, or anything in between, i.e., guilty on some counts but not others.
Update: Tom Maguire weighs in, as do a few hundred of his commenters.
