Comments on: Libby Defense Team Losing Hearts and Minds?

By: vnjagvet

vnjagvet — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 01:31:41 +0000

That is true Anderson, but it is also true that repetition of significant points at the beginning of a long trial is often necessary to assure that the jury recalls the major points at the end of the trial.

Keep in mind that the jury does not hear the stuff that goes on outside their presence, while spectators do. In addition, very few jurors have been paying as much attention to the facts of this case as the typical OTB commenter, so repetition is not as annoying because they are hearing this stuff "as if for the first time".

James' point about the heavy-handed treatment of some of the witnesses is well taken. I lost a case in mid-career partly because my "brilliant" cross examination of a very slippery witness (who was truly a crook) was deemed too mean-spirited by several jurors. I allowed my righteous indignation to get the better of me, to the detriment of the case.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 23:06:47 +0000

It's a truism among my trial-experienced colleagues that a jury *hates* being told the same thing, or shown the same thing, over and over and over.

They do have other places they'd like to be.

And such repetition certainly isn't needed to preserve anything on appeal.

By: just me

just me — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 20:40:44 +0000

I think the defense has to raise this stuff at trial, because they can't use it for grounds for appeal, if they don't bring it up at trial.

I think it is as much a procedureal thing than anything else.

By: bain

bain — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:35:10 +0000

Huh? You guys at Justoneminute have been screaming perjury trap since Libby got indicted.
Walton yesterday called Fitzgerald 'one of the most scrupulous prosecutors I've had before me'. Get real.

By: Patrick R. Sullivan

Patrick R. Sullivan — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:57:07 +0000

It's seems to me the latest motion--to introduce Libby's non-disclosure agreements--by the Prosecution is evidence of panic on their part. They're perilously close to admitting they created a perjury trap for Libby.

By: Coldheartedtruth

Coldheartedtruth — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

will be alienating the jury with what she sees as a direct slap at the authority of the judge. Also Smith is arguing why it is not a smart thing to irritate a federal judge during a trial, something she believes is most certainly happening right now. James Joyner (Outside the Beltway) - Joyner seems to also believe that the Defense team has been a bit over the top when it comes to attacking the memories and credibility of the prosecution witnesses. He makes reference to Smith's idea that this will alienate the jury, but believes