
I've been inspected, see-lected, accepted and di-rected. Here I am, gang, to welcome you to Firedoglake's pregame coverage of the Libby Trial, live from the Prettyman federal courthouse in Washington, DC, courtesy of the Huffington Post.
Actually, for all the levity, entering a federal courthouse is deadly serious business. I've been poked and prodded and shepherded through something like a big MRI tube, and even had to give up my Treo at the front desk, having as it does a camera function attached. Oy. No indulging my addictions.
All the security is a stark reminder that the end result of these proceedings could involve a man having a door close behind him at some point that he cannot open, wherein he loses his freedom, much of the control of his life and much of his lifelong identity, his place in the world. He may or may not be innocent. For all the sports metaphors (that picture above is a hat tip to my Met fan homeboy, Patrick Fitzgerald), this is deadly serious business.
Nothing has begun yet, other than a bunch of press people assembling in the media room. I don't have access to the courtroom today, though we do have a courtroom pass: while voir dire proceeds, and jurors are being interviewed, only two pool reporters have access to the courtroom itself. This is a mixed blessing: I don't have access to anything other than closed circuit television to observe the days's events, but I also have online wireless access (thanks to the helpful intervention of courthouse staff - booyah!). If jury selection takes as long as late Thursday afternoon, then I'll take my turn on press pool duty in the courtroom, but it may not last that long.
The screen in front of me is a large digital flatscreen divided into four boxes, four camera views of the courtroom. One camera appears set on Judge Walton's seat at the bench, one on the witness stand, one at the attorney's lectern and one covering the courtroom itself from a wider angle.
My approach to your coverage will be informed by my training in clinical psychology. Yes, for the process of jury selection, you get a shrink's eye view, with the caveat that in my professional life, I don't specialize in forensic matters or jury selection. I will sustain writing under my online pseudonym out of respect and deference toward my clients in real life: I keep my blogging separate from my professional life.
I'll be back later if and when I have anything to report. So far, everyone has been acting normal, pretending not to notice my paisley moo moo and feather boa.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Fitzgerald just took the podium and introduced his co-counsel staff. Judge Walton is convening the proceedings.
Fitz!
Pach!
Justice!
May justice reign.
Thanks much, Pach — have been looking forward to this for weeks.
Judge Walton is priming the potential jurors on the reasons for and purposes of his coming questions. His tones are stern. Like any federal judge, he’s taking firm control of the room.
EPU’d, but worth repeating here:
On the opening day of this trial, I’ve got to say that, along with hundreds of others, I was first drawn to fdl because of this same subject - the intentional sliming of Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson by the White House. And, possibly, the intentional takedown of Brewster-Jennings as an intelligence gathering tool, but takedown nevertheless. I’ve learned so much about this subject here, and have been linked to others who were also very knowledgeable about aspects of the case and their ramifications.
Over the past 18 months, I’ve watched this site change, grow, teach and evolve. What a great place!
Thanks, everyone. Let’s hope this trial has a lot of positive unintended consequences for the rule of law and the process of government oversight.
Now off to get ready to return to work/school after the Holidays.
Pach
I am SOOO looking forward to this live blogging
Thanks for doing this
Walton telling the potential jurors not to be angry with the lawyers for the questions forthcoming. “If you want to be angry with anyone, be angry with me.” He’s also warning the jurors not to discuss with anyone at all, including other potential jurors, what questions they are asked or their answers. They are also warned not to have any contact with any media coverage of the case, including reading any newspapers, radio, etc.
No hemp shirt? No hackey sack? Great picture of the Mets broadcasting crew btw. Lindsey Nelson rocked, even if he did cover Notre Dame Football!
Although this trial will be chock full of juicy revelations, sadly it has “PARDON” written all over it. Futility, thy name is Dubya.
Digital LSD
Have they sentenced Libby yet or am I being a tad too impatient?
snarkoff
The potential jurors have a sheet of boxes they need to check off in response to the forthcoming questions.
First questions have to do with whether the potential jurors know any of the government’s attorneys, and then they’ll get to defense counsel and the defendent. He’s introducing each lawyer by name, and an FBI agent.
Pass the popcorn!
I’m glad my 18 month FDL investment didn’t turn out to be a sunk cost.
Thanks to our gracious hosts and equally accomplished commenters.
Go get ‘im, Fitz!
Twisted -
For this Red Sox/Notre Dame fan…you got it backwards.
Ain’t that Kiner and Murphy too?
I’m glad Pach enlightened me…method to the Mets madness.
Now, ‘Play ball!’ (And no throwing sand in the ump’s eyes, this time.)
I have to say, having been in both Team Libby and Team Fitz’s shoes in my legal career, this is the point where you feel like your stomach is somewhere down around your shoes and, at the same time, you have this weird need to kick someone’s ass, but you have to dial it back about 20 notches because jury selection is all about being pleasant to the potential jurors, lest they form a poor opinion of you before the trial even starts.
It’s very much like having a job interview — with a hundred or so strangers that may or may not get to know you over the next few days. It’s a weird experience. And I’m so happy to be having it vicariously instead of having had to suit up as a trial attorney this morning.
Thank you Pach, Jane, Christy and all for this historic participation and recognition in the acceptance of citizen journalism. It is appreciated.
Next questions about strong feelings about the Bush administration, positive or negative, that might keep jurors from giving a former admin member a fair trial. Jurors listening attentively.
Next question about Wilson the general outlines of who is Joe Wilson, and Plame. . . a summary of what the case is “supposed to be about,” in Walton’s words. He’s presenting the general outlines, and asking if anyone personally knows anything about this case.
Second question asks if people have heard or read anything about the case in the news media.
Next subpart asks if there’s anything they’ve just heard that might affect their abilities to be a fair and impartial juror in this case.
Can’t we just put them all in jail? Where are all the other investigations the Democrats promised?
pac, are you kidding me? lindsey, ralph and bob? and you’re saying fitz is a mets fan?
as tim mccarver might say, oh baby.
a great, great portent.
Thanks so much for the color, Pach, very happy you are covering this for us.
For other FirePups and newbies joining in, you may also want to set up bookmarks with these resources:
And now back to your regularly scheduled live blogging at Prettyman federal courthouse in Washington DC…
I appreciate your comments here, Pach, but I’d rephrase that last sentence if I were you. “I keep my professional work for my clients in real life separate from my professional blogging, out of deference to both my clients and my readers.”
You’re a pro, Pach - even (or especially) when you’re behind a keyboard.
One thing, though, about your Treo. You really ought to see someone about that addiction. Maybe someone could recommend a good counselor . . .
;)
Cool! Jury selection is loads of fun. No, really. I was sued by a crossguard last year. (don’t ask. She lied like a snake in the grass in a ditch in a canyon) When the jury was selected, I was really impressed at how seriously everyone took it. I couldn’t figure out at first why each lawyer was rejecting or accepting jurors but patterns started to emerge. Fascinating.
They picked a good one for me. It took them about 5 minutes to reach a verdict of not guilty on the first count. The other counts were dependent on the first and it was over. Yeah!
So, I am dying to know what questions they are being asked. What patterns emerge from each side?
rumi at 16 — Believe me when I say that we were all really thrilled at being given the opportunity to have a press pass for this. The details and minutiae that Jane and I and Marcy and Pach and everyone else have been delving into for the past few months on this case…and watching them all come spilling out into the public courtroom…who could possibly turn down an opportunity to watch it happen?
I am so proud of FDL. Pach, I am refreshing as fast as possible to get every detail I can.
Kiner’s Korner….. great memories!
dmg @ 19
In Flatbush, the Irish are Mets fans, and the Italians are for the Yanks. Sorry, there is no in between.
Next question asks if they know anyone else in the courtroom the recognize, including anyone, including other potential jurors.
Then he’s going to name potential witnesses or anyone who may be referred to in thgis case, even if they don’t end up being witnesses. They can check their boxes if they have heard of the person AND what they’ve heard makes them feel they could not be fair and impartial:
Floyd Abrams
Spencer Ackerman
David Addington
Mike Allen
Michael Anton
Kurt Armfeld (?)
Richard Armitage
Daniel Bartlett
Robert (Bob) Bennett
Deborah Bond
Massimo Calabrese
Andrew Card
Jay Carney
VP Richard B. Cheney
Matthew Cooper
John Dickerson
Jack Eckinroad (?)
Eric Edelman
Douglas Feith
Jennifer Feild
Ari Fleischer
Donald Fierce
Allen Foley
Carl Ford
Jared Francisco
Paul Gigot
David Gregory
Robert Grenier
_____ Grossman
Steven Hadley
John Hannah
Bill Harlow
Deborah Hayden
Seymour Hersh
Richard Polk ?
John Judis
Glenn Kessler
Walter Kransteimer
Nicholas Kristoff
This is definitely bonafides for the netroots. Congratulations to FDL for getting their foot in the door and deep appreciation to Huffpo for all their assistance in this.
That would be Mark Grossman (State Dept.) with the blank, Pach. That’s my guess.
Doug Feith? Really?
Oh, I couldn’t be unbiased, glad I’m not in the pool.
Deborah Kuntz
Emily Laramour
Adam Levine
___________
Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Kathy Martin
David Martin
Mary Matalin
Chris Matthews
Jennifer Mayfeild
Scott McClellan
Dean McGrath
John McLaughlin
Judtith Miller
Jennifer Millerwise ?
Andrew Mitchell
Robert Novak
Neil Pateo
Timothy Phelps
Walter Pincus
Colin Powell
Doug Feith — well, that is interesting…
Wow. The stupidest man on the planet made the list.
Pach,
Are you, like, the only blogger reporting from the courthouse?
What are the other “press” (OK, press) doing as they watch those screens?
Do they have little computer thingies that they use by their thumbs?
Or do they have real laptops?
Can you live-blog from there?
Do tell.
This is so, ya know, kewl!
(OK, back to my boring law professor persona.)
Only to the letter “P” so far…
The suspense is wonderful!!
Jen Millerwise, VP press secretary
VP Dick Cheney. . . . heard of him? Can you be impartial towards him?
Simple answers to simple questions. Yes. No.
Dana Priest
Condoleeza Rice
James Risen
Karl Rove
Newt Royce
Tim Russert
David Sanger
Craig Small ?
Hannah Seimers
Bruce Schwartz
William Taft IV
Joseph Tate
George Tenet
Evan Thomas
Larry Thompson
Paul Valery ?
Joseph Wilson
Valerie Plame Wilson
Paul Wolfowitz
Bob Woodward
These are all journalists, FBI, CIA OVP, etc.
Prof — I’m betting that any other press had to give up their “little computer thingies that they use by their thumbs” just as Pach did with his Treo, unless they have an older or lower level device. Newer ones have cameras in them and would be banned.
Does the “One Percent Doctrine” apply during the jury deliberations?
Would the fact that former or present members of the Bush admin impair your ability to be fair and impartial jurors?
Would any of you have any difficulty fairly judgeing the believability of any former member of the admin?
Do any of you have any feelings or opinions about VP Cheney that might . . .. make you unable to be fair in assessing his believability (paraphrase).
kemo @ 26
and for the jews of flatbush, of which i am one, it goes like this:
brooklyn, jewish, liberal, national league.
I can’t believe that I am sitting in an office less than 10 miles from the great Fitzy. May his aura help me to get some work done today…not.
Wolfowitz?
Jeepers, this is going to be really amusing; the comb-licker made the list!!
Would any of you have any difficulty fairly judging believabiity of member of news madia?
Next question asks about ability to be fair regardless of race.
Bill Taft IV was counsel at State, I think — am trying to remember his connection with Grossman on all of this, or whether it was through Fred Fleitz (who is not, I note, on the list…hmmmmmmmm…)
Next he’s introducing concepts such as burden of proof, reasonable doubt, presumption of innocence. He’s asking if anyone has any problem with or problem following those principles of law.
Next, anyone here think a defendent should have to prove his innocence?
Christy — here’s Taft’s Wikipedia entry; note the external link at the bottom (just look for the name Novak).
Anyone here that feels that merely because defendent has been charged, it probably means he’s guilty?
Next. . .. every defendent has the absolute right not to testify. . . you can’t hold any such decision against defendent. Anyone have a problem with that or following it?
Defendant not required to call witnesses. If that happens, would you conclude on that basis that he’s guilty?
There are only two members of the press who are inside the courtroom today — the jury selection is pretty wide-ranging and potential jurors will be taking up much of the space in the courtroom along with the lawyers and investigators. As I understand it, Judge Walton has 100 potential jurors in the initial pool for selection, with another 100 on stand-by if the initial pool is pre-emptively weeded out due to bias or other issues prior to a full jury being seated.
Judge Walton has two seats reserved for press inside the courtroom, and there is a press pool reporting from them for all the folks with passes. Pach is in the WiFi press room adjacent to the courtroom that has video and audio feed, and is reporting from there. He’s done a detailed description of the room above in the comments. Just FYI for everyone.
Pachacutec @ 41
No, I think I’ve got an fair take on him that isn’t biased by emotions, but one based on facts and his pattern of behavior: if he’s talking about restoring the power of a monarch to the Executive branch, he’s telling the truth. If he’s talking about respect for the other two branches of government, he’s selling something.
If you are selected, you must be willing to discuss the facts of this case with your fellow jurors after the case is submitted. Anyone here think they can’t do that?
yknow i have to say, i couldn’t get through that list without having extremely strong opinions about the worth of some of those folks. i’m wondering how many members of the jury pool could.
Hmmmm…MSNBC just had video of the arrival of Libby and his team this morning. Libby selected a striped brown tie for day one of jury selection. Interesting choice.
If you are selected, can you make your own independent assessment of guilt or innocence?
If selected, you will be told that if governemtn has proven beyond a reasonable doubt, it will be your duty to find defendent guilty. If not, you MUST find defendant not guilty. Would anyone here have difficulty following that?
PAUL VALERY, FRENCH POET, 1871-1945
Entre le vide et l’vnement pur,
J’attends l’cho de ma grandeur interne,
Amre, sombre, et sonore citerne,
Sonnant dans l’me un creux toujours futur!
I have long suspected he had a hand in this!
An unbiased jury in a nation divided 70/30. Tough job.
Pachacutec @ 17
Did they ask them about online sources? When I was in the jury pool for the Moussaoui trial, they specifically asked whether we’d read about the case in online news sources in addition to news media.
(We only had a few oral questions, including the one about knowing anyone in the courtroom, and then had a written questionnaire that took about two and a half hours to finish answering.)
striped brown tie = intends to appear traditionalist and helpful like a subordinate might be, not a power tie.
Nuts, now I have to turn on the TV and check cable…
dmg @ 53
I get the feeling that those that haven’t followed this story very closely over the past few years have very little knowledge of most of these people, outside of VP, Rice, Russert, Matthews. Just thinking about my wife - casual news watcher - she would definitely fall into this category.
Is there anyone who believes that everyone’s memory is like a tape recorder and that therefore everyone can remember what exactly what they were told or said in the past?
Is there anyone who feels that a person could not honestly say something they believe to be the truth even if they said something different several months earlier about that same matter?
Is there anyone who believes that it is impossible to mistakenly believe that a person was told something by one person when in fact they were told that thing by someone else several months earlier?
Is there anyone who believes that it is impossible to strongly believe a person has memories about something when in fact it is determined that those memories are inaccurate?
All question paraphrased.
So far, everyone has been acting normal, pretending not to notice my paisley moo moo and feather boa.
Surely, though, with your trained clinical eye, you can detect their jealousy.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 54
Brown is the color of choice for attire for many salesmen.
Swopa — you notice he didn’t mention he was “wearing” an iPod filled with Celine Dion tunes either?
Pach, per everyone else, really appreciate the live blogging.
Rayne at 59 — Here’s the tie of choice today. Very interesting, don’t you think? It says money, along with being a subtle power tie — very Scooter persona, I’d say. Interesting that this is the first impression tie.
From Marcy:
MSNBC’s Howard Fineman, meanwhile, is concerned that the trial will expose an “unhelpful” side of the relationships between government and media, telling Hardball’s Chris Matthews, “It’s gonna lay out all kinds of details about how things work that are not necessarily going to be ennobling or helpful to us in the future
(Raw Story)
Oilfieldguy — yeah, salesmen want to appear non-threatening and helpful, friendly, hence the brown suits and not navy blue or charcoal gray.
Looks more like B.S. warning to me.
Rayne @ 39
Could be, though reporters and organizations who do this more regularly would no doubt know about the restrictions, and might keep non-camera devices for the purpose.
Oilfieldguy @
33
o hecque! can’t stand it. I wooda failed right offn the bat by standing & cheering !FITZ! to start the day.
among the must-knows, OFG, who’s yer pick for stoopidest? I can’t get it pared down past 7-8 min. help me out here, puleeze.
Pach, Christy, Huffpo, all: you’re just golden!
I won’t need any caffeine today, thas for sure! Woo Hoo.
Would any of you have trouble fairly judging the credibility or believability of a law enforcement witness?
Have any of you or your friends or relatives served as or applied to become a law enforcement official, including parole officer, private guard, policeman, prosecutor (wide net)?
Have you or any of your very close friends or relatives had interactions with the police that might impair your ability to give either side in this case a fair trial?
Are any of you lawyers or have any of you studied law?
Have any of you or your close friends or relative served as a defense attorney or worked on defense team or applied to do so?
Any of you have any feelings about prosecutors defense lawyers or people charged with crimes. . . affect your ability to. . . etc?
Ever applied to (friends, family) intelligence job, including CIA?
Ever had access to classified information?
Ever participated in any kind of anti-crime or neighborhood watch group?
Any of you ever participated in any inmate assistance or ex-offender programs?
Any of you ever particptaed in efforts to increase or lessen punishment of people convicted of criminal offenses?
Ever served as a grand juror or petit juror in criminal case?
Christy Hardin Smith @ 54
I think someone told him it makes him look taller.
Have you (close friends or relatives) victim, witness to, or charged with a crime, no matter what happened afterward?
It’s cool that you’re doing this and I’m looking forward to the Bob Murphy style “happy recap” at trial’s end.
Shocking to see Lindsey in such a conservative sports jacket. But that picture looks like circa 1962 so it must have been before he went to live on that commune.
Eeewww…thanks for the pic, Christy; that tie says he has problems with inadequacy.
It’d hit the Salvation Army bin at my house.
Pachacutec @ 27
Pach, you really gotta lay off those cinnamon rolls in the morning. Your thumbs need all the help they can get in the next days.
;-)
(Hugs, hugs)
Pachacutec @ 41
SNORK!
omagawd. i wouldn’ last 30 sec.
Whew. . . fingers bleeding here. . .
At some point, you will be casting judgment on one of your fellow human beings. You will be required to do this. Do you have an religious, moral or philosophical beliefs about that which might prevent or impair your ability to cast judgments?
Do any of you have any health problems that might impair your ability to serve as a juror?
Any of you taking medication that might prevent your ability to pay full time attention to evidence?
Any of you have problems hearing or seeing?
Any of you have problems either understanding or speaking English (good thing he didn’t ask about typing!)
Rayne @ 39
Sure, they would.
But what’s Pach using? (Treo with camera disabled?)
Adie @ 71
Doug Feith. He was given that title by General Tommy Franks, I believe.
Walton estimates trial will take 4-6 weeks. Will you have problems serving that amount of time? Court takes some factors into account: we don’t want you here if you don’t feel, due to time pressure, that you can’t give this your full attention or diligence in decision making. However, we all have obligations as citizens to serve as jurors. . . (lots of explanation of question by Walton). Basically, can you put up and stick with it, and I’m making you think about this very seriously, given civic duty.
So far, the questions seem pretty “boilerplate” . . . but that witness list sure is interesting!
Memo to the FDL Safe House: stock up on hand lotion and bandages. A good masseuse might not be a bad idea either.
Prof — Pach must be on a laptop, can’t imagine him keeping up with typing on anything else.
Pach — fabu job, very speedy typing!!! I’m very impressed!!!
Christy — Team Libby is going to call Paul Vallely to discredit Wilson and Plame…what’s your take on this? don’t rush, we have lots of time.
Walton has some humor. He’s going into this sidetrack about the Russian jury system. Making points about importance of participation in jury system, and the stuff Americans take for granted.
whoo boy, 4-6 wks! Come on, Justice!
Thanks Pach and FDL and Arianna!
OT - CNN - Webb will deliver the Dem response to Chimp’s SOTU - back to work now
Walton has some very likable African American cadence to his style.
twolf1 @ 87
hooray!
Finally– a wise decision by the dem leadership.
Oilfieldguy @ 81
He had a carnal adjective to go with the stupidest. “Plan Of Attack”?
More warning to stay away from any media coverage unscreened by Walton (newspapers), and don’t watch the news.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 66
He’s trying not to be the icon. He is trying to not be the center of attention.
twolf1 — thanks for that.
I’d put money down that Webb ASKED for the opportunity to follow the SOTU. Damn, I might actually have to watch that wretched POS SOTU #7.
Lucky number 7. ;-)
another OT.
Obama is in.
Did everyone step out of the Federal courhouse for a cup of Starbucks?
Now, with all that box checking and questioning reviewed, Walton asks lead counsel to approach the bench. They shut our sound feed for that.
RevDeb @ 67
This doesn’t mean they will be witnesses. This means their names are expected to come up in the trial during important testimony. Odd that Bush’s name is not on ht elist.
OFG 81 thanks!
‘ere. y’wanna be a dear & pass these bandaids on thru to Pach? He.must.not.falter!
Now the jurors are filing out to another room so each can be reviewed, by potential juror numner, individually.
Doug Feith was always my choice of the original leaker. Booyah!
I think they are shooting for credibility.
dmg @
42
yea, but they left town and the Mets came too late for me.
Pach — you might be the best live blogger on the planet. Kudos to you and your fingers.
Hey Pach, what is Fitz wearing?
Pachacutec @ 88
I was impressed with his recent reversal of his opinion on the sentencing disparity between crack and coke sentences. He saw it as unfair to the extra harshness of sentence.
fwiw: my father is a flatbush irishman and a yankees fan.
ccmask @ 104
Boring blue fed suit. Lights are not friendly to his, or anyone else’s, male pattern baldness.
Shock and awe.