Check This!


Google Ad


Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

House Control / TradeSports

« You're Damn Right I Ordered The Code Red! | Main | Libby - A Quick Review Of the Damage Done »

January 18, 2007

Clarice Feldman, Live At The Courtroom

Clarice Feldman, frequent and valued commenter here as well as a contributor at "The American Thinker", is blogging live from the Libby trial.

With any luck, she will grace the comments of this post with her observations as the afternoon unfolds (although I see that the afternoon has substantially unfolded.)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e200d834d99dd653ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Clarice Feldman, Live At The Courtroom:

Comments

How many premeptories..I think 6 for defense 4 for prosecution.
as I was switching threads..another juror came up , said he could not fairly judge and was excused.

It's getting rowdy in the media room with people setting their stop watches to see how long that jurors take before being excused.

New juror up.

Juror was a contractor at the ITC (Steel Report) and handled classified info--designed cover for the report.

Used to be a Guardian Angel--patrolled metro trains. Wouldn't cause him to favor either side.

Is an ex-offender..Bank fraud.

Looking forward to your reports clarice.

...and good luck!

Juror back on stand..Conviction was a felony and in federal system
Excused.
"Nine out of ten" goes the cry..So far only one person made it thru the gauntlet.

Next juror prefers to answer quentions in bench conference. Scrambler on.

I believe that if Wells is going to appeal on the grounds of inability to empanel an impartial jury, he has to make and lose a number of challenges for cause. Has he made any yet? If so, what results?

Heard or read about case

"he said. she said" that's all-"just general"

Remember name is "Valerie Wilson"
"She was an agent and someone named her,,it wasn't supposed to come out"

Reporters all talked about it so she has no prejudice..media coverage has no impact on her."Govt should prove whether he's guilty or not"

aughter is a D>C> policeman..Grand daughter applied for similar position in Virginia.

Fact that witness is a law enforcement officer wouldn't cause her to weigh their testimomny differently.

Has served as juror before.Grand jury.
Her son was before judge Walton in DC Superior Court and was charged with "drugs", pled guilty and went to jail.
She said it was her son's fault.

He did time again

She is a retired postal worker.
She reads Wa Po and watches news--never sees MTP because she's in church then.

Libby counsel: Asked about her knowledge of Wilson/Plame. She saw Wilson on tv.

No opinions about credibility of Bush administration.

Memory--She has had experience where she insisted something happened one way and the other person remembers it another way..She says both could be mistaken.

It appears we have a second juror today--there's excitement in the media room (though still some concern that 2 selected have been removed without our knwledge for personal reasons--at least that 's the body language take of an earlier bench conference).

Another juror..

Laughs and says "I don't think the media would have any effect on my opinions"
Reads paper , watches tv news
Describes his knowledge of the case as one of a
CIA operative whose name wasleaked to press..not clear who did what.."fairly confusing"

He doesn't let media shape his opinions..Doesn't have facts..doesn't know if Libby is guily or innocent.

Best friend is highway patrol officers..friends in FBI, secret service--

thinks he can be fair

Grew up outside SF
UC Davis BS in poli sci
Worked in various jobs--now works for Natl Academy of Science.Chartered by govt..lot os survey and economic stuff as it relates to public policy.

Worked on some DoD projects--analytical re testing


Reads NYT,SF Chronicle sometimes sees MTP and PBS.

Doesn't care what he's heard about them--Knows Mikller was incarcerated for a few months for refusing to give up a source..Read various Columnists at NYT critical of her and her coverage of the war..reads it for entertainment..

No opinion on whether Miller should have been subpoenaed in the first place..
Nor whther she should have resisted the subpoena

Juror's view is that reporters should be subpoenaed only as a last resort.

clarice:
Thank you for carrying JOM's banner into battle.
We are so proud of you. Your minute by minute commentary is giving us a real window into the courtroom. Thanks again for your dedication and willingness to take this on.

What is frightening here is that the MSM has apparently done their job. They have convinced the public that this is about violation of the IIPA. So all Fitz has to do is prove that Libby was not the first, but was the first to do it maliciously and is therefore guilty of violating the IIPA and needs to go to jail.
If defense is not allowed to prove she was not covert, this get scary.

Wells:Goes into background of case--that is of the statements at issue--asks about whether Bush administration was candid about the reasons for going to war?Witness:
Says they were not..Can't say for sure but feels they were careless with the military--

Wells:Credibility of VP Cheney
Witness: answer is rambling..Wells bores in..witness thinks Cheney has credibility problems re the war..

Wells tries to bore in more..Fitz objects and bench conference and scrambler--

Here's why it's a cliff hanger..The court doesn't sit on Fri..If they cannot get the full pool of 36 by the end of the week, they may have to start all over again with a fresh batch of 60 potential An update on preemptory challenges..The defense gets TEN and the prosecution gets SIX..

Anyway, you get the idea--we are trying very hard to establish what we need and when we'll get there..a statistician in the room thinks we will not make it with this panel

Perhaps that's a good thing.

Thanks for live-blogging it for us.

** they may have to start all over again with a fresh batch of 60 potential JURORS***

Wells: probing more re how he'd judge Cheney's testimony..His scepticism--stems from "hyperbole" about danger..Cheney was "careless' and
stretched" re the threats..Thinks that wouldn't apply to what he says about Wilson..Would weigh his testiomny just like anybody else..
Lot's of body language with this witness for Libby's experts to weigh.

Wells: If you were Libby weighing whether he should sit on the jury..Witness says he thinks he could be fair and impartial

Doesn't read blogs..

Thought Libby guilty more often than he thought him innocent--refers to a Cooper appearance on Charley Rose..

Maybe 60/40 in faqvor of guilty..(May or June)
Wells: You could put that 80 to one side?
Juror: Knows he'd have to put that to one side

Wells;Discussions with friends about Libby? Talks about politica almost daily..
Wells:"We?"
jUROR: 3-4 CO-WORKERS.
WELLS;hOW OFTEN DID YOU TAKE POSITION lIBBY WAS GUILTY?

Juror:Said on at least one occasion he said Libby was guilty--possibly more than once.

I believe that the correct cite for challenges is here.

Chapter 24... (b) Peremptory Challenges. Each side is entitled to the number of peremptory challenges to prospective jurors specified below. The court may allow additional peremptory challenges to multiple defendants, and may allow the defendants to exercise those challenges separately or jointly....

(2) Other Felony Case. The government has 6 peremptory
challenges and the defendant or defendants jointly have 10 peremptory challenges when the defendant is charged with a crime punishable by imprisonment of more than one year.

I haven't examined the local rules.

Juror vague re about who Armitage is and what
Watched Fitz' press conference..Has no opinion of Fitz.


Saw pbs show very critical of Administration and the war..Particularly critical about Cheney And Libby says Wells..
Witness remembers it was critical of Cheney, doesn't recall how it dealt with Libby.


Thanks, Rick and Maryrose..

I hope my typing is not driving everyone insane.

Seems this guy made the preliminary potential jury panel..

I am glad I do not have to make these decisions..Corn and I agree this last guy may well be out on as preemptory challenge--I told Corn this looked like one of his readers.

I told Corn this looked like one of his readers.

Did he comment? ::grin::

2 media at a time go into the courtroom where they can see more than we do and upon their return report what we've missed. Last cadre just reported Libby seems relaxed and is drinking lots of water--no idea if it was imported or domestic though, in case this is important to you.

A lot of the people are very nice and taking the blogging thing nicely. Amy Goldstein of the Was Po made it a point to introduce herslf to me. (Classy) Though when I mentioned JOM and AT I am certain I got a blank stare in response.

TM..Do something outrageous to get us a higher profile, PLEASE.

Count shouted out around the room--"Nine out of the 12 rejected today ..There are4 11" potentials left..Nine have to make it or this entire panel is scratched.Or so I'm told.

wow..these jurors just eat up on MSM garbage don't they?

glad u r there Clarice!

I missed if CIA/daycare person made it on to the jury.

Next jury:
Read papers
Realls that defendant was alleged to have given the name of a CIA agent to a person--a journalist..person who was identified was --was done in retaliation for her husband;s statements.

J remiknds her that Libbby isn't charged with that.
She was unaware ofr that.

J explains again what this case is about.
Asks if she could put out of her mind what she heard in the media..she says she can..

Doesn't have opinion on lIBBY'S guilt now ..(Woman is very dramatic--refers to self as :one" Has a Bostonish accent..)

Cousin is a police officer..
We are laughing at this drama queen--she sounds like she's chewing the scenery in an amateur production of The Little Foxes ..
Was mugged 3 times..

refers to self as :one" Has a Bostonish accent.

gag.

ooh. Found it on the other thread.

Mills College,NYU, PhD in Art History from London Univ..Grew up in NY..

Worked at Metropolitan museum..research and writes full time

Doesn't read papers daily--NYT and Wa Po.

Flips thru them.

She recognized mugger on street and didn't inform the police--should have.(wandering--the Ct is interested in whether she harbors resentment against police)
Never watches TV news.

Fitz==asking whether she could put asider her opinions on the war--Juror question too long nd complex or her.
Laughter here.
Fitz redoes it.She says she has a m,oral responsibility to ignore her views.
Libby's counsel on now:Juror
Never watches MTP; never testified in Court;
Read knows that Libby was alleged to have disclosed the name.
Says she can give Libby presumption of innocence.
Witnesses memory disputes among her married friends all the time..She's still on


Pass the pine tar to C! In the final lineup!

This is like turning off the TV commentary to game and getting the local radio commentary instead... Go C! Sonny Jurgenson and Sam Huff on Redskins radio never sounded as welcome.

Fitz==asking whether she could put asider her opinions on the war--Juror question too long nd complex or her.

Libby's thinking "tell me about it."

Next witness up a teacher at a charter school..
Libby's counsel:
Probes what she knows about about Scooter Libby..She says just the name..
Memory conflict question--she thinks it's altogether possible that people can remember conversations differently and not be lying.

Opinions about credibility of Cheney--says she has none.
Teaches 7th and 8th grade at public charter school.

Fitz--how do you tell if an account was wrong because it was a lie or an honest mistake--She saysw with people she knows she relies on their reputations, in other cases she'd have to look at the record.

She made it it appears.

Clarice,

Are the jurors able to hear each other? Or are they taking them in one at a time?

Next juror--been arrested four times--and it was never him--has bad opinion of LE..Bench conference and scrambler on.

excused..

We are still in the dark about the actual numbers..but we think we need to get 7 out of the next 8 or this panel is over..
And an entire new panel will have to be brought in..

There was some mumbling that J Waltom excused 40 of the 100 potentials who showed up at the outset and that he may have been far too optimistic.

Next juror.

Fiance is an atty who is assisting in representation of Woodward in connection to thiws case.Works for Howard Shapiro and was present at deposition of Woodward--Said she gave him no further details.

Can be fair and wouldn't discuss case with his fiance.

One of attys he works for is acquainted with Jeffrees(sp)

Sue, the jurors are brought in separately..

Juror does general litigation including some criminal cases..

I believe that all the prospective jurors are hearing the Q and A's of those who are being voire dired.

The idea that they have to get a full jury out of this batch or start fresh next week is a new one to me. Can anyone present with Clarice confirm that?

Okay. Thanks.

The idea that they have to get a full jury out of this batch or start fresh next week is a new one to me.

Me too, but I don't know very much about Federal rules and I know even less about criminal rules.

Clarice - If you ever need as assistant - I would love to work for you. You are my hero.

BTW Fitz' questions are terribly compound and comples. Libby's lawyers questions--and the judge's--are short and crisp and easy to understand.
Juror is applying for a security clearaqnce in connection with a case.

There are no windows in this room. It's cheaply constructed with fake paneling, stained wall ceilings and fluorescent light.
It's like being in jail or middle school.

Juror has assisted in gj proceedings and military court martial..Attended Duke law school.


OT--I think that new panel thingy is a local rule--one day , one trial..If you are not picked for a potential juror on the day you show up, you are excused..this group (all from the original cadreof 60) must form the pool for this trial --they cannot be held over and combined with another pool of people called in for next week.

OT--The other jurors are in a different room in the courthouse and do not hear these potential jurors questions and answers at voir dire.
If jurors make it thru this it seems they are sent to another room. If they are excused they report to the clerk and are tagged out of the system.

he went thru an elaborate story of his general sense of the case--it was quite detailed..formed no opinion of it because it seemed "all over the place" and "unclear".

Remembers these names being discussed:Bush, Cheney,. Libby, Andrew Card, Novak and Cooper (only 2 reporters' names he remembers).

Remembers discussion about reporters' being compelled to testify.
Remembers a "female reporter" and Cooper refused to answer certain questions and that it was resolved but doesn't recall how it was resolved.Knows it's not a recognized privilege..

Circumstances of Woodward's deposition.
Thought it was extraordinary in a criminal case for a witness to give tesimony in a deposition and not before a gj.
Believes Woodward said he's received this info on Plam'es id..doesn't remember who he received it from--remembers it was someone in the administration.

More questions from Fitz to find out depth of interesat and knowledge--Juror admits he read the indictment some time ago.

It was attached to a website.
Reads blogs..

Glenn Reynolds (instapundit); TPM; Daily Kos, Volokh and some legal blogs;

This should be interesting. Will they allow someone that admits to reading blogs to sit on a jury? I can't wait to find out.

Doesn't know if fiance will be in ct room when Woodward testifies; wouldn't treat matter any differently if she were.
Reads Wa Po, sports pp of Nashville papers(home town) --ocassionally NYT or WSJ..

Doesn't recall reading editorial pp of WaPo and Remembers Novak column ann Wilson op ed but didn't read those articles.

He's representing military guys in ct martial charged with killing Iraqi dcivilians.

Just happens to be involved inthis case.

Application for security clearance is in connection with that case.

Libby lawyer:
establishes both guy and his fiance are young associates.
Juror thinks that administration was less than entirely forthcoming but doesn't rise to level critics say.
Thinks there were good reasons for war--faults them for poorly communicating their views.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon






Traffic

Wilson/Plame