Libby Witness Grenier Has Reconstructed Memory

Robert Grenier, the second prosecution witness against Scooter Libby, testified that, although he had told the FBI and the grand jury that he really wasn’t sure whether he had mentioned to Libby that Joe Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA, eventually came to “feel guilty” thinking “maybe I had revealed too much” and, over time, came to think he had probably mention that fact.

Not particularly compelling testimony, frankly.

FILED UNDER: General, ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. This is useless for Fitzpatrick. Another witness with a less than perfect memory, who is admitting to having been influenced by newspaper stories in revising his story.

    Wells will have a field day on cross.

  2. bain says:

    Agreed that Grenier is not that helpful wrt Libby knowing about Wilson’s wife. I think all the prosecution is trying to establish is Libby’s deep concern about Wilson. Sounds like they are moving along the timeline they set up in the opening …

  3. paul lukasiak says:

    This is useless for Fitzpatrick. Another witness with a less than perfect memory, who is admitting to having been influenced by newspaper stories in revising his story.

    hardly…. one of the things that Fitz is doing here indirectly is reminding the jurors how they “reconstruction” memory — and why Libby’s “memory defense” makes no sense. When someone is unaware of the significance of their answers, they make no effort precisely recollect details they don’t know are relevant. When those details become relevant, people can go back and reexamine their memories….and come up with slightly different answers.

    Fitz is going to use Well’s attempts to impeach Grossman and Grenier in his final arguments — appealling to the “common sense” of the jurors that while these kinds of small details can be forgotten, Libby’s lies are “whole cloth”….

  4. clarice says:

    “Reconstructed” his “recollection” on press accounts-Now that is unique. And preposterous given the almost uniformly bad reporting on the case ,including of course the utterly disingenuous presser announcing the indictment.

    In sum, I didn’t know closer in time to the event, but having read a lot of lies maybe I did.

  5. Karl says:

    “”When someone is unaware of the significance of their answers, they make no effort precisely recollect details they don’t know are relevant. When those details become relevant, people can go back and reexamine their memories….and come up with slightly different answers.””

    Yeah, just what Fitz will argue at closing!!

    Real World-Check:

    1. Grenier is lying to stab Libby
    or
    2. Trying to sound more plausible because in reality they were all gossiping much about Wilson & Wife.