home

Libby Jurors Confusion Explained

By Jeralyn, Section Lewis Libby Trial Coverage
Posted on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 09:03:57 AM EST
Tags: Libby Trial (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Marcy at Firedoglake is back in court at the Libby Trial. These are the questions the jurors submitted yesterday afternoon:

Is the prosecution alleging that Mr. Libby did not make the statement to Cooper as presented to us in the Indictment OR is the allegation that Libby did know Mrs. Wilson worked for the CIA when he spoke to the FBI on 10/14/03 or 11/26/03?

Is the prosecution's allegation in Count 3 that Mr. Libby DID know that Mr. Wilson's wife worked for the CIA when he made statements to the FBI on 10/14/03 OR 11/26/03? (Page 74/75 …"that Mr. Libby did not know if this was true.")

In determining Count 3, are we allowed to consider Mr. Libby's grand jury testimony?

Both sides have agreed on how the judge should respond and the Judge has so advised the jury. The judge's written response is here.(pdf)

More....

Update: Matt Apuzzo of the Associated Press reports:

Defense attorneys could read them as a hopeful sign if they suggest the entire jury is confused, but prosecutors might see them as an opportunity to clarify something for a lone holdout juror.

There was a single jury instruction for counts 2 and 3 on the false statement charges pertaining to Tim Russert (Count 2) and Matthew Cooper (Count 3.) I've culled out the language pertaining only to Count 3.

The confusion seems to be over this part:

Count three of the indictment alleges that Mr. Libby falsely told the FBI on October 14 or November 16, 2003, that during a conversation with Matthew Cooper of Time magazine on July 12, 2003, Mr. Libby told Mr. Cooper that reporters were telling the administration that Mr. Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, but that Mr. Libby did not know if this was true.

Update: As I say in the comments below, I think there is a good chance of a verdict today. I suspect the jury has decided counts 1, 2, 4 and 5 and is only still struggling with Count 3.

When their first substantive questions began coming in, I speculated they would start with count 1, realize they had to decide counts 4 and 5 (perjury to grand jury) to resolve it, and finish with counts 2 and 3. I still think that's what they are doing, although this is more tea leaves.

< Understanding the Separation of Church and State | U.S. Atty Pressured to Shut Down Republican Corruption Investigation >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Libby Jurors Confusion Explained | 3 comments (3 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I don't think Walton made that assumption (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 10:00:56 AM EST
    yesterday, it was a hypothetical.

    I suspect the jury has decided counts 1, 2, 4 and 5 and is only still struggling with Count 3.

    When their first substantive questions began coming in, I speculated they would start with count 1, realize they had to decide counts 4 and 5 (perjury to grand jury) to resolve it, and finish with counts 2 and 3.  I still think that's what they are doing, although this is more tea leaves.

    I think there is a good chance of a verdict today.

    Do you have a take? (none / 0) (#1)
    by sdf on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 09:35:51 AM EST
    As folks are saying over at FDL, this seems very far from suggesting a finding of fact as Walton seemed to be suggesting (apparently hypothetically) during discussions at the end of the day yesterday.

    -- Stu

    Hmmmm (none / 0) (#3)
    by annburns on Tue Mar 06, 2007 at 10:01:39 AM EST
    I don't think these notes are positive for the prosecution at all. They are considering item 3 of Count 1 - which indicates they didn't find Russert credible. They don't seem to find Cooper's testimony credible because they seem to be asking if they have to decide that Cooper's version was correct or if they can find that libby lied to when he said that he didn't know 'if it was even true'.

    I still think they may be working toward an acquittal - even though they have doubts about Libby's testimony. I hope I am wrong, but that is what I fear.

    Libby Jurors Confusion Explained | 3 comments (3 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment