I would still like one MSM journalist to interview the folks who have been coming to the trial for the whole month. The one reading and watching in the hallway. Iowa farmer, retired teacher from New York, retired state department employee. It would make for a great story ..why are they there? What is their take on the trial? etc. etc.

Barbara’s roots connect her to Libby.

Lawyer Smith @ 226

O.K., I guess as an officer of the Court I have to apologize for the comment above about most juror’s intelligence and retract it entirely. Trials are human events full of human errors.

Those of us that have tried cases have inevitably had more than a few lousy juries. Sometimes no explaining or understanding how they reach a result. This jury should have been back with a conviction within 24 hours.

you pick the juries…..

TeddySanFran @ 136:

The breaking news alert didn’t say anything about dosage, or what he’s already taking in terms of blood thinners.

Personally, I don’t believe that Cheney has blood.

He’ll escape to the hospital just as soon as the guilty verdict comes in and then reporters won’t have access to him. A little different version of the rehab escape when one gets caught.

O.K., I guess as an officer of the Court I have to apologize for the comment above about most juror’s intelligence and retract it entirely. Trials are human events full of human errors.

Those of us that have tried cases have inevitably had more than a few lousy juries. Sometimes no explaining or understanding how they reach a result. This jury should have been back with a conviction within 24 hours.

bdu @ 133

Chaos can be any number of cats. Mostly it’s a matter of balancing the time you have available with the cat’s request for all your time (as in 24/7).

(I come from a cat family. The first cat I remember was three months older than me.)

I agree, though my point is that I don’t believe it’s possible in any way to decrease the chaos by increasing the number of animals.

Along with my two cats, I sometimes birdsit a green cheeked conure. Let me tell you, an irritable bird (since he’s away from home) two cats who have fixed their interest on said bird, now THAT’s fun.

This jury is lost. Walton’s answer should have been “no,” as the prosecutor is not required to present scientific evidence that Libby could not have a memeory problem. They’re beasically saying they won’t convict absent this type of evidence which means they’ve missed the point. The Gov is asking for a verdict based on common sense in the face of Libby’s defense and the jurors are declining to exercise common sense, instead looking for science specific to Libby that does not exist, (a general memory expert would not be probative as to Mr. Libby’s abaility to remember facts). Basically the Gov is asking the jurors if they believe a guy like Libby ever misremembers anything, given his job and duties, and therefore knowingly lied and obstructed justice. The defense is asking them to believe Libby just plain old forgot things as did the witnesses against him, so to mean that even if the witnesses are right about what happened, Libby’s mistakes were innocent, not purposeful. Fitz laid out Libby’s alleged motive and the defense said it was no motive at all. The Court turned it over to the jury to decide and now they are discussing anything but the actual evidence in the case. They are discussin gthe case they would have liked to seen rather than the one they did see. Libby is going ot be acquitted.

I agree, or hung jury. If the jury thinks the government has to prove a negative, Fitz has a jury that is thinking too much.