Powered by TypePad

« Further Unraveling Of Duke Lacrosse Case | Main | "The Note" - Seven Days After Reading It, You Die... »

February 27, 2007

Comments

Jane

My guess is that it is mundane.

cboldt

My guess is that it is not mundane.

Tollhouse

My guess is that it is a Moon Dane.

Patrick

I will repeat mine:

"Can we award Libby more than his lawyers are asking for?"

sammy small

Or a question about Claire Danes

PMII

I think they are confused. I think it's easy to go down the wrong road on this multiple times.

MarkO

Jane,

I won’t tangle with you, but we’ve seen mundane notes and the Court did not address them with counsel in open court. Maybe “in court” means in Chambers, but if it is open court that may mean a jury hung on some points, if not all. The question of lying seems to permeate all the charges, so I tend to think it’s all or nothing. But, I’m guessing like everyone else.

danking70

Definetely not mundane.

BarbaraS

The note definitely says "Has anyone seen our lucky tee-shirts?"

Barney Frank

I would guess they would like to know if Judge Walton has any information on whether Shep is gay.

BarbaraS

Or even we have a verdict but want to wait until tomorrow when we can wear our lucky tee-shirts again just to be consistent, you know.

Jason Leopold

The jury has found Libby guilty on at least one count, but have given him 24 business hours to get his affairs in order.

ghostcat

I hear they want the art curator back.

maryrose

This is the funniest blog I have ever been on. You guys are a riot! As Alice said"curioser and curioser... What in God's name does that jury want now? My hair is getting grayer by the minute. Let's get a decision on this sucker so we can talk about the result already. Time to step up and be counted.Let's get this show on the road!

danking70

Curator left her Valentine's t-shirt...

Alcibiades

BF: LOL

Jane

Mark,

I'd prefer your outcome to mine, but I am trying very hard to not get my hopes up.

I do think that jury questions during deliberations have to be dealt with on the record, mundane or not. I may be wrong about that, but I've never seen it any other way.

WA Moore

My guess: Hung on three charges. Guilty on two.

My hope: Not guilty on three. Hopelessly hung on two.

maryrose

sammy small:
LOL!

lurker

What happened to Seixon's website?

BarbaraS

Someone who has been listening to this trial, flawed as it was, and who had an iota of common sense would have rendered a verdict days ago. Reasonable doubt is what they should be looking for and what they have is absolute doubt. With everybody contradicting themselves with poor memories how can they not reach a verdict. There must be some on this jury who are as dense as posts or maybe want to extend their days in the sun.

maryrose

ghostcat: I need a new keyboard...

kate

OK...

We already had the request for office supplies and the request for photos of the witnesses. Those questions were not discussed in open court so this has to be more substantive than those but...

not a verdict and not a notice that they are deadlocked (that would be a statement, not a question). So my guess...

Can we listen to Libby's GJ tapes again. (OK, probably not).

Can we submit a partial verdict (wouldn't they be told this in instructions).

Can we have another juror? to replace non-Tee shirt lady (no.)

Another tainted juror?

maryrose

Barbara S.
So true. this case is a no brainer-acquit already...

PMII

When they requested the supplies & pictures earlier - wasn't it by way of a note to the judge? Or was it a request? We knew that right away. So why wait..

Is it something the judge wants to think about, so it put it off? Do the lawyers know the content of the note?

Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report

It's their lunch order for tomorrow. BarbaraS, never expect jurors to be attentive, intelligent, and decisive. Remember, a jury is made up of people who weren't smart enough to find an excuse to get out of jury duty. I'm not saying it's right, but it's true.

Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report

MayBee

They want to know how long they have to work to come to an agreement, because they haven't been able to do so yet.

maryrose

kate:
We don't want another tainted juror because then the first alternate is not the one we want. Come on decide already and stop this game of 20 questions!

arthurize

not to be detail-overdosed, but if the note presents a "question", then it doesn't signify a verdict.It may represent that the jury is hung; but even that seems unlikely. A note advising the court that they are hung would not present a question.Usually a question from the jury means exactly that, i.e., can we see this evidence; can we have the charge read to us again; etc. etc.

maryrose

Maybe the jury wants a drunk Andrea Mitchell to testify or Russert to explain his Imus interview-the real one not the fake one after he testified.

Patrick

The question may be "how long must we deliberate before we can give up?"

I suspect they want some portion of testimony read back. Jurors frequently do that, Judges will often refuse, and instruct them to rely on their memories. I think Judges should not refuse such requests, particularly in longer and detailed trials.

mark c

If judge Walton doesn't cry or get his own television show we can call it a win for America, regardless of verdict.

PMII

Has anyone gone over to the swamp to see what they are guessing?

reliapundit

they are hung.

Paul Zrimsek

The art curator is already back, and says the note is a Mondrian.

lurker

What's up with the Seixon website?

Jane

Is it something the judge wants to think about, so it put it off?

The lawyers have to be there for the question, the hour was late, it was easier to do it in the morning.

Charlie (Colorado)

My guess is that it is a Moon Dane.

My guess it's a moon dance.

And a marvelous night for it, don't you think?

verner

Hopefully, they wanted to wait until Kinkos has their 11 happy face t-shirts ready.

sbw

the request for office supplies and the request for photos of the witnesses

Ah, ha! ... Moustaches!

dick

I just wish they would decide so that we won't have to read any more of Sniffen's newspaper articles. He keeps writing the articles saying that the whole thing is about the White House outing a CIA covert agent and that is what the newspapers are printing in the headlines. Every day the same thing. sooner or later the people are going to believe his lies and then when the verdict comes down they will believe that the White House gummed up the the whole thing and that it was all a face by the VP. His latest article claims that Libby told the reporters unquestionably that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent and that she was covert and that therefore the jury has to find him guilty.

pldew

They asked for H&Rs Bloody Mary recipe.

topsecretk9

SD sent this to me--it's all there is on this filing so I don't know what the substance is :
"
02/26/2007 303 NOTICE of filing Exhibit B, DVD (DX1813), introducing additional evidence to impeach government witness Tim Russert by I. LEWIS LIBBY re 282 Memorandum of Law. (Attachment: DVD) (mlp) (Entered: 02/27/2007)

02/26/2007 Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings as to I. LEWIS LIBBY: Jury
Deliberation continued for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 16
before Judge Reggie B. Walton. (erd) (Entered: 02/27/2007"

Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 05:21 PM

posted in the Hanging thread.

Syl

Since we don't know the instructions and the wording of the verdict form, maybe they're asking:

Do we have to be unanimous that he's guilty of THIS part of count 1? Or is it okay if some of us think THIS part and some of us think THAT part?

BarbaraS

Reggie is unsure of the answer and has to consult yet again other jurists or maybe the meter man.

PMII

Thanks Jane,

hit and run

Jury Note:

We're Deadlocked.

Hopelessly.

7 vote to nominate Fitzgerald's rebuttal for Emmy for Best Comedy

4 vote to nominate rebuttal for Pulitzer for Fiction

PMII

They want to know if they can have time off for good behavior

lurker

Ah...Seixon's done with blogging or on hiatus.

I hope he's on hiatus as I have enjoyed his posts.

MayBee

The art curator is already back, and says the note is a Mondrian.

In a beige world of notes, the art curator produced a note with a rioteous palette of color and passion.

(Sorry John A. Flemming)

Dan S

Jury question:

So, was she covert or not?


I think they are hung too. That was my prediction from the start, and I'm sticking to it!

Sara (Squiggler)

Seixon has graduated and started a new job. He is closing his blog down.

BarbaraS

Maryrose

Do you suppose the jurors; IQs are in the double digits?

Dan S

I'm hoping this really is a hanging jury.

"Your honor, can we hang the prosecutor?"

PMII

BarbaraS,

WMP

Dave in W-S

Jury note:

"Can we get a broadband hookup? The courthouse wireless network is way too slow, especially trying to get through these loong threads at JOM."

BarbaraS

Nick Kasoff

I have never served on a jury. Am I bragging or covered with shame?

hit and run

I just wish they would decide so that we won't have to read any more of Sniffen's newspaper articles.

I've been waiting for this day...

I want to be the first on record ... if/when this particular person misstates some important aspect of the story ...

What has that guy been Sniffen?

Posted by: hit and run | January 25, 2007 at 10:49 AM

EH

It's funny to see people say they hope Libby is either getting acquittals or a hung jury. Why would you hope that Fitz doesn't know what he's doing?

clarice

Note:"Is Croatia the new Riviera?"

Charlie (Colorado)

Why would you hope that Fitz doesn't know what he's doing?

Nah, we've settled that. Now we're worrying that the jury doesn't know what its doing.

hit and run

Jury Note:

"Can we have Judge Larry?"

goldwater

Dear Judge,

What is the capital of Djibouti?

Best regards,
The Jury

PMII

Is it time to start guessing the answer to the question?

centralcal

Maybee: Too darned funny!

Jane

Why would you hope that Fitz doesn't know what he's doing?

No hope involved there.

BarbaraS

Why would you hope that Fitz doesn't know what he's doing?

It depends on what he is doing. Bringing a legitimate issue to trial is not what he is doing.

PMII

I sorry but I don't know what WMP is.

PMII

BarbaraS,

wet my pants

azaghal

...if you want tolerance, you have to be tolerant. I get a lot angrier at gay bashing than she ever does.

Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 05:19 PM

Sooooo...

Describe your feelings with regard to Tim Hardaway:

Very Tolerant

Moderately Tolerant

Just Barely Tolerant

Intolerant

People Like Him Shouldn't Be Allowed To Live

How about this: if you're truly tolerant you'll have to sincerely tolerate intolerance. Sound like nonsense?

kaz

My guess on the note: "Why exactly are we here, again?"

Sara (Squiggler)

azaghal -- sounds like dhimmitude to me.

BarbaraS

PMII

Sorry.

PMII

BarbaraS,

Don't be. It's the hardest I laughed all day.

azaghal

sounds like dhimmitude to me.

Posted by: Sara (Squiggler) | February 27, 2007 at 06:07 PM

Could be.

Jane

Sorry azaghal,

I don't know who Tim Hardaway is.

Rick Ballard

"Is Croatia the new Riviera?"

Yes, but I would reccommend staying within 30KM of Split.

richard mcenroe

It's Taylor Dane. Got all her albums.

maryrose

H&r:
I just told my daughter about your last comment.H&R YOU ARE BACK with a vengence!

BarbaraS

The problem is that we never expected a whole lot from a jury in DC and they are so far living up to our expectations.....almost.

maryrose

Hardaway is a basketball player who recently said"I hate Gays"

Jane

BTW azaghal,

Why are you transposing conversations from one thread to another? Sounds like you are hankering for a fight.

azaghal

I don't know who Tim Hardaway is.

Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 06:13 PM


got google?

james

What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

roanoke

Does Dick Cheney weigh more than a duck?

Jane

got google?

So far you aren't worth it.

Gary Maxwell

What is the capital of Djibouti?


When Walton asks why they want to know, the written reply comes back " some of us dont think Fitz can find it with two hands and a flashlight!"

BarbaraS

Is that throat swallow or bird swallow?

Sara (Squiggler)

From the other thread:

SD sent this to me--it's all there is on this filing so I don't know what the substance is :
"
02/26/2007 303 NOTICE of filing Exhibit B, DVD (DX1813), introducing additional evidence to impeach government witness Tim Russert by I. LEWIS LIBBY re 282 Memorandum of Law. (Attachment: DVD) (mlp) (Entered: 02/27/2007)

02/26/2007 Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings as to I. LEWIS LIBBY: Jury
Deliberation continued for 2/27/2007 09:00 AM in Courtroom 16
before Judge Reggie B. Walton. (erd) (Entered: 02/27/2007"

Posted by: clarice | February 27, 2007 at 05:21 PM

Jane asked and I dittoed: Has anyone ever seen additional evidence allowed in during deliberations?

Franklin

My guess (a serious one, so I hope I'm not spoiling the mood) is that they're hung on ALL counts and are asking Walton how to proceed.

It's not that I haven't seen juries take this long, but with multiple closely related charges, a jury whose sympathies are generally divided but at all flexible will have finished horse-trading and splitting the difference by now. Those who want to convict, especially, will be satisfied with some of the pie if they can't have it all.

Valentines day clue: "This may be the last time we have unanimity." By that point, the jurors probably knew each other and where they likely stood on the case pretty well.

Charlie (Colorado)

From the other thread:

Hah, it's posted in this very thread. Someone call DoJ, this has to be obstruction of something or other.

Patrick

Evidence is closed prior to final. Newly discovered evidence can come in only in the event of a new trial, and there better be a good reason it wasn't discovered in time to use it in the original trial.

clarice

I answered that, Sara--I haven't, but if the defense has newly discovered relevant evidence and the trial hasn't yet concluded, they have no choice but to try to get it in. I am certain this is not the first time this has happened. OTOH I think it unlikely they will get it in. On appeal, however, had they not offered this in now they'd be barred from raising it.

Charlie (Colorado)

It would be lovely to discover it's something exculpatory that Fitz knew about, wouldn't it?

azaghal

Why are you transposing conversations from one thread to another? Sounds like you are hankering for a fight.

Posted by: Jane | February 27, 2007 at 06:17 PM

By the time my dialup can load a new JOM thread, or refresh an existing thread, I'm usually way behind the discussion. I transposed just about the last post on a Libby thread to the newest Libby thread as a way of continuing the conversation.

As for hankering for a fight, I was sincerely interested to learn how far your tolerance extended. My experience is that people who proclaim their tolerance in the terms you did are usually very intolerant of people whose tolerance extends in different directions than your own. More generally, I find that the world of human beings contains many mutually exclusive attitudes. For that reason I find expressions of universal tolerance to be lacking in intellectual rigor--to be quite frankly irrational.

Tim Hardaway is now retired. Until recently he was best known for his crossover dribble.

Patrick

Reading the filing info from above, it includes as an attachment a DVD. Because it pertains to the impeachment of Russert, I suspect that it is a DVD of MTP episodes in which Russert describes the Grand Jury process, in contradiction to his testimony stating that he was unaware that attorneys aren't allowed in the grand jury with witnesses. The judge ruled on that motion, this is probably preserving the record for appeal. Just speculation.

MarkO

As a hypothetical, what would happen if a witness recanted in public during jury deliberations? Or, even if private? What if Russert had said on Hardball, “Now I remember I may have discussed Wilson’s wife.” What if he claimed he found notes?
The fact that it is a DVD suggests it was a public comment from Russert.

Anyway, you appellate mavens, speak to me.

Sara (Squiggler)

If it is something truly excupatory wouldn't that necessitate a mistrial (with prejudice?) or whatever it is called?

clarice

I thought they offered that already, but you might be right.

theo

Of course additional evidence is not permitted during deliberations. I suspect that the filing in question is something that was presented last week or before and the clerk is just getting around to docketing it.

I also think we may be really overthinking the "jury question." MOST of the time these are either about the instructions or the evidence. It could be a LOT narrower than "what do we do if we cannot agree."

Let's wait and see people.

steve

"Could we talk to a memory expert?"

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame