No verdict from CIA leak jurors

[cal04]

Jurors deliberated Wednesday without reaching a verdict on whether former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby obstructed the investigation into who leaked the identity of a CIA operative married to a prominent Iraq war critic.

The eight women and four men heard 14 days of testimony, a full day of closing arguments and more than an hour of instructions from U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton before beginning their discussions. After 4 1/2 hours of deliberation, the jurors went home until Thursday.

The jurors include a former Washington Post reporter, an MIT-trained economist, a retired math teacher, a former museum curator, a law firm accountant, a Web architect and several retired or current federal workers. There are 10 whites and two blacks — unexpected in a city where blacks outnumber whites more than 2-to-1.

Libby, who was the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, faces five felony counts that carry a combined top penalty of 30 years in prison. If convicted, Libby probably would be sentenced to far less under federal guidelines.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070221/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_trial

[elfin]

1. Not good - FOUR hours??

Without a guilty verdict? Seems cut and dried to me. Something stinks.

[WI_DEM]

2. of course it's cut and dried to us, but we weren't on the jury either

they will take a little time.

[flyingfysh]

4. four hours doesn't mean anything

I was foreman of a jury that took longer than that on a simple DUI case. We were just being very, very careful.

[PA Democrat]

8. No. It's not uncommon for a jury to take much longer.

Especially considering the amount of testimony and evidence.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[hang a left]

14. Don't forget to subract an hour lunch.

There is a few charges that they have been asked to decide upon. I am sure that the jury, who is reported to be above average intelligence is taking their time.

This isn't the OJ trial.

[antiimperialist]

3. When has a verdict ever been reached in 1 day?

The Michael Jackson jury found unanimity after 20 hours (4 days) of deliberation. Ken Lay's jury took 6 days to reach a unanimous guilty verdict. Why are some of you acting all nervous for?

[antiimperialist]

5. 10 whites and 2 blacks, in a city where blacks outnumber whites 2-1

Interesting. And not good.

[Sadie4629]

10. A jury of his peers

How tough must it have been to find 12 criminals with stupid nicknames?

[newyawker99]

11. Hi Sadie4629!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[marmar]

12. I'm sure the defense peremptorily challenged most of the potential black jurors...

Well aware that this administration is about as popular among African Americans as the Confederacy.

[NastyRiffraff]

6. Any courtroom lawyer can tell you...

it's a complete waste of time and energy to try to guess a jury's verdict based on how long deliberations go on. Or how many/what kinds of questions they send to the judge. Or something like one juror not wearing a red t-shirt like the rest :)

BTW, four hours is NOTHING. You have five counts, and the jurors, if they are conscientious, will go over all five, one by one.

[eppur_se_muova]

7. Let us all wish the jurors a restful night's sleep, and clear heads in the morning.

They have a supremely important decision to make. All the best to them.

Oh, and I look forward to hearing the results of their deliberations. :)

[lonestarnot]

13. We have to plan for dual release of A. N. and S.L. decisions and

which one gets more play on Friday.

[KharmaTrain]

15. Lots To Digest In The Jury Room

Many here are expecting the jurors to rush back and white smoke to come out in less than an hour. Even the OJ jury didn't come back this fast.

The judge has carefully worked with this jury on the importance of this case and the specific charges to be addressed. I would imagine the first thing these jurors were doing was to once again revisit the charges and then to see how the testimony squares with their interpretation of the laws and charges.

Remember, the jurors have never spoken about the case until the doors were closed yesterday afternoon. 14 people with different seats and surely opinions. There was a lot of testimony to digest...and some of it will need to be refreshed for some. This is where the process gets its most intersting as the jurors...many who started as strangers when the trial began, but have been in this intensive relationship since...I'll bet many friendships have been made...all outside of the interests of the case...but now things turn very serious. Jurors who were friends earlier may find themselves at opposites in how they view the charges...or the quiet person in the corner all of a sudden speaks out. I would imagine many wanted to go home and "sleep" on not just all they've witnessed in the courtroom, but also the first reactions in the jury room. Today, we may not see a verdict as well as getting 14 people to agree on anything is difficult...and even with compelling evidence (or our perception thereof), one juror can stick to a principal or viewpoint and it takes time for that perspective to change or for their perspective to prevail over others. As one whose participated in this process, it's a fascinating dynamic that I expect will play out throughout the day today.

It's hard to guess how a jury will react, but one thing the judge encouraged when I served was to find every possible way to reach a verdict. This is where the judicial system trumps the political...as in the privacy of that jury room, the law is being carefully examined and I am very confident (even if it's an acquittal) this jury is being careful in reaching a verdict so that it's a strong and unanimous one.