Oklahoma kiddo @ 20

Does anyone expect fresh indictments to come as a result of this Libby business?

This has been on my mind too. Speculation> RevDeb @ 10

could someone clue this non-lawyer into what “giglio” means?

Marcy (actually Fitz and Wells) used it a lot at the end of the last thread.

YES and also a “Jenck” (sp) and “proffer” LHP we need you . . .

Giglio is part of the name of a case decided by the US Supreme Court in 1972. The Court held that a promise made by one Assistant US Attorney (not to prosecute a prosecution witness in exchange for the witness’s agreement to testify against a defendant) must be disclosed to the defendant’s lawyer because the benefit to the witness constitutes exculpatory evidence. That is, witness receiving the benefit may be lying in order to receive the benefit, rather than testifying truthfully. In Giglio the AUSA who tried the defendant’s case didn’t know, or claimed that he didn’t know about the promise made by the previous AUSA. Therefore, he didn’t disclose the promise. The Supremes didn’t buy it thereby imposing a duty on prosecutors in future cases to find out and disclose whether any benefits have been promised to prosecution witnesses in exchange for testimony. Giglio is one of four principal cases decided by the Supremes that flesh out a prosecutor’s duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense. The first case was Brady v. Maryland, followed by Giglio v. US, then US v. Bagley, and Kyles v. Whitely.

The legal principle is that a defendant cannot get a fair trial if the prosecution hides exculpatory evidence from the defense.

Jencks material refers to investigatory reports by law enforcement officers and all oral, written, or recorded statements by witnesses whom the prosecution intends to call at trial. Such material is referred to as Jencks material because the Jencks Act, a law passed by Congress in the thirties I believe, provided that federal prosecutors don’t have to disclose the identities of their witnesses or provide any of their reports or statements until after the witness testifies on direct examination. In practice, however, Jencks material is turned over no later than the Friday before the Monday that a federal trial commences.

The primary purpose of the Jencks Act is to prevent defendants from dissuading witnesses against them from testifying (think Mob trials). Of course, protecting witnesses from retaliation by defendants is rarely a legitimate concern and many states have rejected the trial-by-ambush approach encouraged by the Jencks Act and replaced it with open discovery rules.

Needless to say, federal prosecutors enjoy an enormous advantage over federal defendants since they can investigate and charge through secret grand jury proceedings and not disclose who their witnesses are until just before trial. Whether you believe that’s good or bad depends on whether you’re pulling for the prosecutor or the defendant to win.

Now, you too can sagely remark, “Sounds like a Giglio violation, to me,” as you chow down on a cocktail weenie at your next Inside-the-Beltway party. Or, you might say, “Libby’s toast because his lawyer will be stepping all over his dick when he crosses Fleisher next week, but at least he bought himself some time by running out the clock so he has the weekend to review Fleisher’s Jencks material, not that it’ll do him much good because Scooter’s boat is going down and Scooter-baby cain’t swim.” [Insert appropriate know-it-all chuckle]

Welcome to that exceedingly peculiar lingo called lawyer-speak. But don’t forget, you’ll blow your cover if you say gigolo instead of giglio.

A proffer is a statement by a witness made to a federal prosecutor regarding what he or she would testify about. Proffers are usually given by witnesses who are represented by counsel seeking benefits in exchange for their client’s testimony.

Now we know NBC has the most watched and trusted journalist so by giving them the leak information like these journalist have national security access. I guess that means that all the other stations are working with the White House and NBC isn’t. No wonder NBC has more viewers.

…can anyone in the Bush Admin own stocks…and if they can…do youse think a majority of them have bought up NBC (Westinghouse?) stocks? Friends of W outside of the White House?

Reading these threads and posts has me as excited as I was back when I was a purple-haired secretary (temporary and on my way to Amsterdam…where I ate tons of Leonidas chocolates), and was listening to the Iran-Contra hearings on NPR. I will never forget Oliver North’s affected-adolescent voice warble about “the good, the bad, and the ugly”.

If History rhymes, what rhymes with ugly?

I’m on the Left Coast and can’t really catch the ongoing live discussion/blog very easily.

And I think I also did on the earlier topic where he fdlblog first raised his assertion (Cathie Testimony #3?)

*****************

My money is on Bolton as the source (perhaps via Fleitz) for Cheney’s info about Plame’s status in Counterproliferation. After Cathie Martin told Libby and Cheney about Plame, Cheney then went to Bolton to get more information on her.

as much as I wish that were true, neither name is on the list of names that (I believe) was provided to potential jurors (to see if they knew anyone who would/might be involved in the trial) — so i don’t have much hope.

I’m convinced that fdlblog is a troll.

Murray Waas is a fine reporter — and is basing his use of the word “discuss” on the grand jury testimony. The indictment itself (as previously cited) delineates the precise nature and limits of the “discussion”, i.e.

23.
On or about July 12, 2003, in the afternoon, LIBBY spoke by telephone to Cooper, who asked whether LIBBY had heard that Wilson’s wife was involved in sending Wilson on the trip to Niger. LIBBY confirmed to Cooper, without elaboration or qualification, that he had heard this information too.

case closed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01736.html

I would love to be a fly on the wall at the Martin mansion, tonight ;-)

“Honey, I don’t WANT to hear about how bad YOPUR DAY was…I’ve been through hell, too!”

God knows we don’t trust what the corporate media says…FDL is keeping them honest, at least on the Leak case.