Now, I tried to display -- let's go to the next slide -- graphically just how you ought to think about it.

If you think the witnesses that testified in June or July on your left and Mr. Libby on your right, again, the question is not what Scooter Libby remembered in real time back in June or July. The question is what did Mr. Libby remember three months later.

Those witnesses, again, all they can do is say this is our recollection in June or July. They don't help you in answering the question, what did Mr. Libby remember in October. Did he have a good faith misrecollection? Or did he lie? They got to give you powerful evidence of lying. And none of those witnesses help you on that question.

Next slide. In essence, from a graphic point of view, there is just this huge evidentiary gap. They've got witnesses in real time in June and July but no witnesses concerning his state of mind in October. Again, no witnesses come into the courtroom and say that in October he lied.

Again, there is no smoking gun document. There is no expert testimony that he could not have forgotten.

I mean, nobody took the stand and said, based on an empirical evidence, there is some study that says it's impossible for him to have forgotten in October what he was told in July. The record is barren on that point. There is no type of physiological evidence or scientific evidence. It's just barren. (my emphasis)

Libby could have made an innocent mistake in October. And Libby, under the rules of this justice system, he doesn't have to prove that he made an innocent mistake.

They've got to prove that he was engaged in intentional lying. And they haven't given you any evidence; they haven't given you anything. They're just asking you to speculate.

Nobody can say with any degree of certainty that he just didn't have one of those moments that we all have in life where he thought something happened one way and it happened another. They have given you no evidence.

Of course, Wells' closing argument is not evidence and the jury doesn't have the transcript. Maybe a juror took notes during it. Or, maybe a juror, contrary to Libby, has a particularly good memory. Or, maybe it just really hit home with one (or more) of them.