Login Here
graphic courtesy Monk at Inflatable Dartboard
As Jane has warned you, at 4:30, Walton will dismiss the jury (for the day, we think), and give the jurors an instruction. I suspect he may give them tomorrow off, which will bum me out bc I want to go home and I'm not sure I can get a flight and the snowstorms are starting up again in the Midwest and I'd really like to avoid getting stuck somewhere for a day again.
Both legal teams are already in the court room. Jeffress had left the building a few minutes but he made it back in time--I guess is the test case for 15 minute verdict watch.
Wells, Fitz, and Bonamici, with a short chat. Nothing contentious, though.
Word up on the jury request--the jury has asked to leave tomorrow at 2 to attend to some issues they can't attend to over the weekend. Walton granted it. But there is apparently one more thing.
4:24
Apparently tomorrow is parent-teacher conference day in the DC schools. So perhaps the jurors want to be good parents, after having done their good civic duty for over a month. That's cool with me, I guess.
Ted Wells has his head face down on the table, shaking it from side to side. Now he he's just got his head in his hands, looking fed up. And now with a BIG yawn. Him and me both.
Okay, Walton is in.
Walton: THe reason I had you come back this evening is because apparently the jury, at least someone in the jury asked if she could get the dictionary. I told her that no, you can't have a dictionary. Obviously I need to explain why. While we try to use common language, sometimes words have a legal connotation, therefore it would be inappropriate to try to find definitions. If they have questions they need to raise it with me, so I can raise it with counsel. I can bring them in the court to do that. I know they won't be happy about coming into the court because they're not dressed to come into the court. But if you me to bring them in and instruct them here in court.
Bonaimici whipsers to Fitz.
Both Fitz and Wells say something I can't hear.
4:35
Walton mentions the note about tomorrow. I assume we won’t have a veridcy either.
Jury in.
Walton. I understand that somebody had made a request for a dictionary. We tried—or at least I try best as I can to use common language. Sometimes common language has legal connotations. If there’s any wording in the instructions, you can’t look through a dictionary to find out what the definition is. With that, since it's almost 5:00, we'll go ahead and...
Wells and Fitz approach.
Walton: let me expand upon what I said--ANY words, whether they are part of the instructions or part of the evidence, you can't look them up. If you have questions, you should make that request of me. In light of the fact that it's almost 5:00, we'll have the Marshalls take you home and we'll see you tomorrow at the normal time.
4:39
Beer Thirty
From Jane:
Pach and I just got back from the courtroom. The jury is having a high old time together. They were to a one grinning from ear to ear, giggling, having the time of their lives. Pach noted that none of them looked at Libby, and they did not seem like a group of people who were in disharmony -- there wasn't one who was hanging back, nobody was pissed at somebody who was intractable. They seemed to be thoroughly enjoying the process.
As Pach and I were heading to the elevators, I told him that I suspected that the thing that was happening to the jury is what happened to people on the blogs who got into this story -- they got addicted to it. They're busy sorting through the details, peeling back layers of the onion, fascinated by the process of mutual discovery as they explore the characters and events that led up to the trial. Pach said in his shrinky expert opinion that this made a lot of sense.
I didn't get the feeling we're getting out of here any time soon.
Share This 
Spotlight
Fitz!!!
Fitz!
I guess someone has a doctor’s appointment or something?
Oriend Lodge Update: Word is that there is a note that the Jurors have requested to be released early tomorrow, at 2 PM for “personal, professional and medical obligations.”
Judge Walton is granting the request. It is noted that tomorrow is Parent Teacher conference day in Washington DC and many of the jurors are parents.
Arrggh. They must think they won’t be done by tomorrow either.
Fitz!
Flush!
Not that we could thank you all enough, but Jane, Pach, et al, the entire FDL gang, you all rock! Thanks so much for your dedication and work.
path - also an MI transplant
But there is apparently one more thing.
More cookies dammit, more cookies!
Longtime Clinton supporter John Catsimatidis will host a fundraiser at his New York home for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, the Huffington Post has learned.
Saturday’s event is a 40-person sit-down with former President Bill Clinton alone.
Attendees are asked to make the maximum allowable contribution of $4,600 to his wife’s campaign.
You go Hillary!
pathfinder @ 7
Yeah, absolutely.
These people have kids in D.C. public schools? Shocking.
Great, another unsequestered weekend in which the jury can get contaminated!
another weekend? My fingernails are down to the nubbins already….
so the plumbers are at it again?
Interesting that the jury requested an early day. That means that one member, or certainly less than eleven members, needs to do something, and the other members are amenable to that. That suggests that things are amicable in the jury room. The fact they neede to ask for early dismissal suggests that they don’t expect to be done tomorrow.
They want half a day off to attend to personal things?
Obviously someone has been invited to Anna Nicole’s funeral.
“One more thing…”
What is this, a keynote? ;0)
I think at least one of these jurors is part Ent.
Obviously they have no intention of reaching a verdict before 2 tomorrow.
Attaturk @ 8
>But there is apparently one more thing.
Send more Chuck Berry!
Marcy, snow may be the least of your problems. We have winds here in Iowa sustained between 20 and 30 and gusting to over fifty mph. Also flood warnings all across the Midwest wherever there are rivers and streams. All of this is heading east.
Good luck to you. I’m afraid you’ll need it.
Please watch closely if the jurors look directly AT Libby.
Hey kids — we don’t want to restrict comments on this, because it may or may not be “the thing we’ve all been waiting for….dammit where’s the verdict?” — if everyone could please, please, please be judicious with the comments until we know, I would very much appreciate it. Luv ya.
Good Gawd man. These guys will still be deliberating when the Iranian-War-related-CIA-Agent-Outting thing starts up. Jury people, dress up nicely on Monday and Give The Truth back.
the plumbing and the trial have been suffering from …
“four flushers“
(ka dum bump!)
The Words None Dare Say: Nuclear War
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0228-28.htm
haha. seriously EPUd (is there a term for being left behind 2 threads or more?). there’s a FISA motion on PACER from Fitz but nothing else. RH, you’ve got mail. should folks go to gabbly to chat?
Servers overloaded.
A dictionary!!!!!?????? This is getting to be re-goddamn-diculous! They better not be looking for the meaning of “doubt”
lier
Pronunciation: ˈlī(-ə)r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lēogere, from lēogan to lie — more at lie
Date: before 12th century
: a person who tells lies
Lie: To fib; to tell an untruth; dissemble; mislead.
Usually causes pants to catch on fire.
Any more questions?
annx @
4
de
It’s the start of Passover I think; sabbath on Friday at sunset.
Well, knowing the word they want the definition for should be a nice clue to chew on.
Perhaps they want the legal definition of “cloud” as in “over Vice President”?
I wonder what the juror who asked to see a dictionary is going to do as soon as they get home tonight
AP - Just hours after floating the idea of cutting $20 billion from President Bush’s $142 billion request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad was overruled by fellow Democrats Thursday.
I just love the courage imbedded in my Democratic Party.
No no no, the judge misread the note, the jury was requesting a meeting at 4:20. This is why they requested so many “post-it notes.” I bet you didn’t know Zig-Zag sold office supplies, huh?
They have also requested large quantities of microwaveable chicken nuggets, cheetos, an assortment of Jones Co. sodas, and the collector’s edition DVD of Jim Henson’s The Dark Crystal.
eggheads - feh!
I knew there was some serious obtuse energy on that jury.
I wonder if they are arguing about the definition of “reasonable.”
Orient Lodge just said that jurors seemed friendly to each other and did not look at Libby.
Shit. I bet they want the definition of “reasonable” and “doubt.”
As a parent with child care responsibilities, if there is even a prospect that I might possibly be tied up with something tomorrow afternoon that conflicts with taking care of my kid, I don’t wait until tomorrow morning to take steps to resolve the conflict.
When you are part of a jury, the rest of your life doesn’t disappear. It changes, but it’s still there. They’ve been going at it hard for a month now, and to have one (or more) ask for a couple of hours off on a Friday is not a big deal.
GIVE ‘EM A BREAK!
It doesn’t mean that there won’t be a verdict tomorrow; only that they want to avoid feeling extra pressure to reach one because of conflicts with other obligations. There’s enough pressure on them already.
So that’s it? A very anti-climactic beer-thirty.
the plumbing,
the investigation
and
maybe the servers now
are all suffering from
“Four Flushers“
(ka dum bump)
First time I’ve ever heard an explanation of the no dictionary stuff.
I have heard that experts in the jury can’t use their expertise in deliberations. Like the physicist can’t explain how bullets can’t do magical things. I understand why that would be, but if so, they should let jurors make objections during the trial. Now that would be fun!
toolpusher @
21
I like how you think, but tell me what it would mean (one way or the other).
Anyone have any ideas as to why they would want a dictionary. Anybody have a guess on where they are going with this. They are obviously been very thorough
Depends on What Your Definition of “Is” Is
misremember
No juror left behind.
Anybody care to venture a guess as to why the jury would like a dictionary?? Anyone have their crystal ball all shined up and can give us some possible scernarios??
Aren’t the jurors just going to look up the words in the dictionary when they go home? Or did Walton forbid them to look in any dictionary, ever?
On the plus side, the FDL tech crew just got a nice preview of what they’re in for when the big 15-minute verdict warning hits.
How did that feel, guys?
can someone please explain what this PACER FISA thing is?
If I were on the jury, I’d be doing just what they are doing. Take all the evidence, and proceed one step at a time.
I believe the jury probably enjoying their “Sherlock Holmes” approach. Good for them!
I don’t care if they take a month. They know this is, by now, an indictment of this whole crooked administration.
I hope they really cross their “T’s” and dot their “I’s”.
I think the wait will be worth it!
did we kill the server?
I tell you Marcy, they are so involved that many of them are thinking about writing a book on the case!At this stage they are likely finding all the lies that Libby WASN’T charged with! And counting up all the times he said “I don’t recall” in his statements and testimony! Must be well over a thousand!
Dee Frances @ 31
Passover isn’t until next month.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 34
We can see how the Republican Party was hijacked. We can see how the Judiciary was hihjacked. We can see how the civil srvice has been higjacked. Why would the Dem party be immune to this process? The whole damned country’s a fixer-upper. As Norske would say, lots a work to do.
Of cookies? No, I don’t think so.
Pacer is an electronic database for court filings.
FISA = Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It’s a “secret court,” set up in ‘78 that can issue what amount to secret warrants. Christy has done a lot of great posts about it.
hang a left @ 44
Silver lining: As a prosecutor here in Ohio the past 16 years whenever a jury has come back this late in the game for “definitional re-instruction” my verdicts usually follow in very short order.
Do not read too much into this. It could be that the lone hold-out just needs a little intellectual security blanket to wrap his/her final decision in. If, however, the group needs to go through this word parsing exercise, that could bode poorly for Team Fitz (and America!)
Cookie server? No, I don’t think so.
Oy. And now to the Metro, and home.
They wanted to look up all the synonyms of GUILTY!
Dee Frances @
31
According to one of my astronomy books, Passover starts on April 3.
Well, that fits with the theory I floated earlier, that these jurors are having too grand a time to try to wrap this up anytime soon (the t-shirts should’ve been a clue).
Not a lot of empathy for poor little Scooter it seems…
Elliot@50 - PACER is the Federal Court’t electronic filing and information service. FISA is the Foreign Intelligence and Security Act which allows for filings to be handled on a top secret basis by a secret court
hang a left @
44
“I’m telling you dammit, G-I-L-T-Y just doesn’t look right”
So Walton tells them he can’t let them look at a dictionary and then immediately sends them home…where they probably all have a dictionary they’ll look at as soon as they walk in the door.
Thanks very much Squonk.
John Casper @ 57
thanks, what does it have to do with Fitz? Is he requesting a FISA decision?
Still Sabbath at Friday Sundown.
EW, No flights? Maybe can you hitch a ride back to the midwest with Fitz!
OT: Abramoff still singing http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002635.php
You nailed it, Jane. This is the most fascinating political mystery of our times, and now they’re hooked. And the answers are all there. They’ll sort it out.
I predict 11 new FDL readers/commenters as soon as the trial is over. All Plame, all the time. Yeah.
define: dark cloud lol
Jeez, I hope this isn’t another O.J. verdict. The jury can look happy about an aquittal too.
Dee Frances said:
This year Passover falls in the beginning of April.
I suspect the dictionary request means there’s a single holdout… someone arguing over definitions, and everyone else is saying “for crap’s sake, let’s put an end to this.”
OT– Coincidence?
Spin?
BS?
I report, you decide.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200.....taliban_dc
Uggggghhh!
“They’re busy sorting through the details, peeling back layers of the onion, fascinated by the process of mutual discovery as they explore the characters and events that led up to the trial. Pach said in his shrinky expert opinion that this made a lot of sense.
I didn’t get the feeling we’re getting out of here any time soon.”
And that’s a good thing? (I hope, anyway)
Here’s another question I’ve been pondering. Assuming a guilty verdict (on any/all charges), what is the jury’s role in sentencing? Does the sentencing phase involve the jury, and if so, is its recommendation binding?
It’s possible that he could be requesting a wire tap on someone’s phone/email. That would be an ordinary use of the FISA court. IANAL, so there could also be many other explanations. Also, it might not have anything to do with Scooter’s case.
Scarecrow @ 70
And 14 more copies of Marcy’s book sold . . . 11 jurors, 2 alternates, and the dismissed juror who probably bought it by now. I wonder if she has found us yet?
Sparkles the Iguana @ 48
The jurors are not supposed to do any type of research period. I’m a little worried one or more of them will go home and do it anyway. That would be disasterous.
This jury is taking way too long for a relatively
simple case. They only have to decide if they believe Libby did or did not lie to the FBI and GJ. I suspect they are now far, far off track. They need to be sequestered as a kick in the
pants to reach a verdict on the charges not figure out the machinations of the OVP et al.
But, a funny jury story… I’ve only served on one jury, but one day the court clerk forgot about us and didn’t come to let us out for lunch. We told him our lips were sealed as long as he brought us seriously delicious baked goods the next morning; he agreed! Sadly for us, that afternoon a prosecution witness caused a mistrial and we never did get our goodies.
OK. Since, based on shoddy information that was first reported, I unreasonably FREAKED OUT and opined there might be a hung jury on at least one count earlier, let me try to reclaim some dignity and agree with Peterr@40 that the jury may just be evidenceing the intelligence we have previously ascribed to them and requesting the early release tomorrow only as a contingency plan. Simply because they made that request does not mean they won’t reach a verdict tomorrow. Although i trust Pach and Jane’s gut feeling that the jury is in no hurry implicitly, not only because of Pach and Jane’s intelligence and instincts, but also because they are there and there is no substitute for that.
What’s that saying about a laughing jury?
That they don’t convict?
janethepain @ 73
The O.J. jury spent only three hours deliberating.
Another Gore fan:
Warming as dangerous as war, U.N. chief says
Upheaval from droughts, floods ‘likely to become a major driver of war’
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17401890/
So if they arrive at court tomorrow in their good clothes, it could just be dressing up for the parent-teacher conferences……
janethepain @ 73
except they never deliberated
I love Pach’s analysis.
11 newly minted Plameologists!
Earlier today I was speculating that something like this might happen:
*xyz @ 123
Mimir @ 83
Yikes.
Think I’ll just wait until ‘the’ verdict is in. Do I have another choice?
John Casper @ 78
ahhh…
thanks!
Mimir @ 83
Welcome, Vickie Toensing!
I hope whatever the jury is doing shows some deep thought; perhaps even a bit of their own ‘connecting of dots’. Perhaps they’ll link something to Cheney. [Please & Thank you]
Oklahoma kiddo @ 90
You could speculate endlessly!
janethepain @ 73
They didn’t look a Scooter.
That’s a BIG clue as to what they’re thinking.
Hard to believe they could take this amount of time and not have a guilty verdict on at least one of the counts (counts 2 thru 5), and if that’s true, then count 1 Obstruction must follow with a guilty verdict.
At least that’s what I think.
FDL lawyers, what do you think.
A Friday verdict might be something a sequestered jury would look forward to.
Y’all got me excited - I couldn’t get in the site after I was done working, and I thought perhaps something exciting happened.
It seems that the members of the jury are taking their responsibility very seriously, asking a lot of questions and being very thorough. I think that’s fantastic, for the sake of justice. I want them to take all the time they need to come to the correct decision on each charge. I also imagine they’ll follow the judge’s instructions to not use a dictionary when they’re home tonight.
Speculating over what they might want to define - there are thousands and thousands of words in this testimony. It’s not healthy for us to worry what word they may have wanted to define. It could literally be anything. I don’t think we should try to read the jury on this issue, nor on the request for early dismissal tomorrow (people need to make alternate arrangements tonight if they have to be at the courthouse tomorrow afternoon, and even if they’re close to a verdict, they don’t know if there will be another power outage, water emergency, the judge will be called away in the AM on another matter, or other issue outside their control that would hold them there. Clearing this up at the end of the day today instead of tomorrow makes sense).
Interested Observer @ 43
Well, I’ve waited for juries, and I’ve sat in that chair looking at a defendant (but I didn’t pass voire dire) and my experience has indicated to me that it is difficult to look a man in the face after you’ve judged him and voted to send him to jail. It is much easier to look at someone you think is innocent. So the fact that they did not look at him says “Fitz!” to me.
However, the demeanor that is described here, the laughing and joking offsets that. My guessing is full circle back to zero! Laughter doesn’t go well with these serious overall issues.
Unless they are punchy like us by now and are just thrilled at a half day off tomorrow… oh and also, our general rule of thumb was a quick verdict was an innocent one, and a long verdict was guilty… but you know… they call it a “rule of thumb” for a reason!
81 phillydem says:
March 1st, 2007 at 2:14 pm
I don’t think it is that easy of a case at all. It has many twists and turns. I have been studying Plame for years. Hopefully that are as enthralled as I have been.
Hey maybe we will get a couple of unindicted conspirators if that is their function.
John Casper @
78
John - if you haven’t already done so, please read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.....FISA_court
Totally off topic, but there is a stunning interview of one of the fired prosecutors, Inglesis from NM, who is saying that he was fired as political payback. 2 republican congresspeople called and pressured him to file indictments.
When the podcast is up on npr it is must listening.
Its really long…and this guy is not pulling any punches.
Be safe, Marcy, lots of weather out there. I’m on travel in Florida and they’re talking about tornadoes here. I have been a lurker, but no more! I am reading Marcy’s book and bought one for my brother who’s equally hooked on fdl. FDL has become my #1 blog. You gals are making history and we’re so proud!! What a contribution to our democracy in these “interesting times” as the Chinese say…
hang a left @ 47
Maybe they’re looking up “hush hush” and “on the QT.”
The jurors wanted to make sure they spelled “Treasonous Bastard” right for tomorrow’s t-shirts.
I am reminded of the 1980 movie Airplane with Lloyd Bridges playing McCroskey.
McCrosky : “Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue”. ( inhales some glue and falls over )
Verdicts Monday ?
That the jury wouldn’t look at Libby is a most hopeful sign, I believe. If they were the least bit sympathetic toward him, I can imagine they would want to see what shape he’s in. They’re probably so thoroughly convinced he’s a weasel now, after sifting through the evidence, that they don’t even want to set eyes on his schmarmy little face.
Great post!
I’m guessing Jane is right–they are all very much engaged into the drama that we are all hooked on.
If this is true, then I can’t possibly see them acquitting him on all counts (or any for that matter).
For the most part, the people that argue that Libby ‘forgot’ are the folks that have a superficial understanding of the case. The deeper the jury digs into the evidence, the more likely i think they will convict. Thoughts?
They don’t convict if they laugh during the trial per se, especially with the defense at bat. If they laugh during deliberation they will return a guilty verdict. Mark my words.
John Casper @ 78
But then, why would he be requesting this during the Libby trial????????????
Could it be for Dead-eye Dick????????
Patsy Stone @
73
Purim is March 4-5 this year. But it’s not a High Holiday.
new thread from Christy
Maggie Rheinstein (102) — welcome to the Lake! thanks for de-lurking, look forward to hearing your feedback about Marcy’s book and from your brother, too.
Rev. Howard Furst @ 108
I sure hope so.
- Not-Vickie
phillydem @
81
disagree respectfully this is not a simple case… Marcy has written a book and many blog pages on the inter related characters and actions
disagree respectfully the jury is offtrack…
Fitzgerald crafted the four corners of the indictment carefully, Walton reviewed boxes of evidence to make sure it is pertinent ant not spilling intelligence beans
there are eight hours of grand jury tapes to listen to, and compare to transcripts and the jury’s own notes
big job if it’s to be done right
Since nobody got my joke in gabbly:
Michelle Malkin reporting on the tornadoes in Enterprise, Alabama. She say that the damage isnt really as bad as the media makes it out to be. She cant find Little Jimmy Munson sited in an earlier AP report claiming that his high school was “destroyed”.
Little Jimmy was later located and suspended for talking to the media.
The jury could be laughing and happy because they know they are about to do the right thing (convict of course).
This jury is obviously serious about the task assigned to them. Let’s face it, if they “get” what truly happened in this case (how the administration conspired to out Valerie Plame for political purposes), they probably are thrilled at the prospect of handing out some long overdue accountability. I would be laughing and happy too.
Of course, this is all rank speculation, or at least, wishful thinking. But I could be right.
Woodhall Hollow @ 101
did he name names yet?
Pay no attention to jury questions, requests for dictionaries, or even mid-deliberation demeanor. It can mean something, or not, but seldom what you guess it is.
The failure to look at Libby and demeanor will mean something when they come in with a verdict, but not before.
Relax every one. I have waited for something like 100 juries (98% civil)and trust me, nothing means anything till they come back with a verdict.