Libby trial judge writes memorandum outlining reasons behind decisions on evidence

[maddezmom]

Libby trial judge writes memorandum outlining reasons behind decisions on evidence
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The judge in the criminal trial of Lewis "Scooter" Libby is making it clear for the historic record that he thought the defendant would take the stand, and that the presumption figured strongly into his decisions about classified material he would have allowed into evidence.

U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton also suggests the defense could have improved the prospects for acquittal of their client had they called Vice President Dick Cheney to the stand.

The jury has deliberated eight days so far on a five-count indictment against Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff.

more;http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/03/02/friday/index.html

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Think they will have a verdict next week?

I know that the judge has told them he won't give them a dictionary--they are to ask him for any definitions they need. They've also ordered a lot of office supplies, including sticky notes.

[Lerkfish]

2. I'm curious why a judge would rule based on whether a defendent would testify

a judge should rule whether something is allowable evidence BASED ON THE EVIDENCE ITSELF.
Any lawyer or judge worth their salt knows a defendent is not guaranteed to take the stand.

[Journeyman]

3. I'm curious why he's compelled to speak out now, before the verdict. . .

I understand how his statement may be used in an appeals process, but I don't understand why he decided to issue this before the verdict.

[Lerkfish]

equally perplexing, I agree. hopefully some DU lawyer type will explain it to us.

[rodeodance]

4. yeah, He is on the edge of assuming they jury will convict. I am no so

sure.

[Bandit]

6. It would cheat the prosecution of cross examination

Without testimony from Libby on the "evidence" it would be unfair to the prosecution.

[UpInArms]

5. related: Libby Trial Exposes Neocon Shadow Government

http://www.observer.com/printpage.asp?iid=14264&ic=News+Story+4

Day by day, witness by witness, exhibit by exhibit, Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor in the trial of Dick Cheney’s man, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, is accomplishing what no one else in Washington has been able to: He has impeached the Presidency of George W. Bush.

Of course, it’s an unofficial impeachment, but it will also, through its documentation, be inerasable. The trial record—testimony, exhibits, the lot—will be there, in one place, for investigators, scholars, reporters and Congress to pore over. It goes far beyond the charges against Mr. Libby. It is, instead, a road map to the abuses of power that Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney and their shadow government of neoconservatives have committed as the neocons carried out what they had been planning for years: an invasion of Iraq—and other military excursions—for the purpose of expanding American dominion.

From the start, when he was named special prosecutor in late 2003, Mr. Fitzgerald seemed to understand and embrace this much wider significance.

Yet he was careful not to overreach, crafting the indictment of Mr. Libby narrowly: He had lied to a grand jury, and to F.B.I. agents, about leaks he had given his favorite media people to discredit a vocal critic of the war.

The critic was former Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Mr. Wilson, whose diplomatic service had included work in Africa, was asked in 2002 by the C.I.A. to investigate unconfirmed reports that Saddam Hussein had recently tried to purchase 500 tons of yellowcake uranium from Niger to be further refined to produce nuclear weapons.

...more...

[AndyTiedye]

7. Libby Was All Set to Testify Against Cheney, but…

…every time he did he started making choking sounds and pulling at his collar.
Then for some reason he seemed to lose interest in saying whatever it was he was going to say.