Special prosecutor (Fitz) upset over defense jury tactics

[sabra]

http://www.kvia.com/Global/story.asp?S=5956612&nav=AbC0

Special prosecutor upset over defense jury tactics

WASHINGTON The judge is hoping to have a 36-member jury pool by later today, in the case of a former White House aide. But it's not easy.

The special prosecutor is upset that Lewis Libby's lawyers have been weeding out people who don't like the Bush administration. This morning alone, both sides spent 15 minutes arguing with the judge over whether to dismiss a single juror -- a woman who calls the Iraq war a "horrendous thing."

Once three dozen finalists are found, 12 will be picked to hear the perjury case against Libby. He allegedly lied to investigators tracking the source of a leak that disclosed the identity of a C-I-A operative.

[nashville_brook]

1. good luck finding people who aren't pissed at the administration

[AndyA]

6. Exactly.

There is not much of a middle road: you either don't like Bush/Iraq/GOP, or you're a right winger. Of course, that would be OK for the defense, but can't have anyone with a strong disapproval of the Bush Administration. (Another shining example of hypocrisy in action.)

I think Fitzgerald will do OK, he's a very deliberate guy, a reason and a time for everything. He's worked too hard to muck this up by seating a bad jury.

[zbdent]

20. You'll get 12 people who are saying they can be impartial

just so that they can be "stealth" jurors who, if O.J. Simpson were a Repuke, would have not only exonerated him, but re-executed OJ's wife and Ron Goldman ...

[Blue_In_AK]

2. It seems to me that if the defense weeds out all the anti-Bush

potential jurors, all that will be left will be wingnuts. There aren't too many people that don't have an opinion one way or another on the administration. I would think the best they could do would be split the difference unless somebody is over the top in their support or opposition.

[goclark]

3. It still not to late for Fitzmas

He sure fizzled ~ please get him a backbone again.

[Peace Patriot]

22. Hey, GoClark! How many Bush Junta aides have you prosecuted? n/t

[goclark]

23. I'm not putting him down ~ maybe we will see some daylight

and some of these thugs will go to jail.

[gratuitous]

4. With the Bush administration polling at less than 33%

Finding a pool of jurors that doesn't dislike this administration would be so out of proportion with a representative jury as to be meaningless. Fitzgerald is right to be upset; people with such manifest mental illness as to support the current administration should not sit on a jury.

[MidwestTransplant]

7. In DC no less.

They will probably try to get a bunch of unemployed Republican lobbyists and unemployed staffers on the jury.

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. Maybe the defense should ask for a change of venue?

Like to Outer Mongolia, just so they can find a jury.

[Cobalt-60]

26. The Mongols would kill these criminals on sight

[CrazyOrangeCat]

5. Cheney is pulling all the strings he has.

You can bet he's working this dawn to midnite.

Fitz is up against the most evil bastard on the planet.

[napi21]

8. I have always been under the impression that both the prosecution &

the defense have the right to pick jurors, and each side has only a few they can reject...something like 3 I think. I understand why Fitz is upset, but I don'tsee it as a real problem, unlessmy understanding of the process is wrong.

[Missy Vixen]

25. The judge has unlimited strikes for cause

The defense has 12 peremptory challenges, the prosecution has six.

Since this article was written, Patrick Fitzgerald evidently successfully argued that the defense is preventing the seating of jurors by uneven application of previously agreed upon guidelines. I'll be really interested to see who the defense goes after on their peremptory challenges, and hopefully they'll happen Monday afternoon.

Julie

[Uben]

9. My experience with juror selection

...is that both sides get X amount of strikes to eliminate jurors they think might be biased against them. I don't know how fed courts operate, but would assume it is similar.

[hlthe2b]

11. They aren't even up to the voir dire (peremptory strikes) point

Parachutec (Firedoglake.com)--who is live blogging from the court room is reporting that once the judge agrees on a pool of 36 POSSIBLE jurors, THEN the prosecution and the defense begin the voir dire process in which they can eliminate additional jurors. Apparently, (assuming what he is reporting is correct), the prosecution holds 6 peremptory strikes and then 2 more for potential alternates, while the defense holds 10 strikes with an additional two for alternates. That makes for a total of 20 strikes to come from the eventual availble pool of 36 to be completed, leaving 12 jurors and 4 alternates.

So, this suggests the Judge is allowing the defense to run rough-shod over the initial process. I call BS. :mad:

[hlthe2b]

10. So, they are looking for a jury of monsters and sociopaths...

who do not believe the Iraqi war to be a "horrendous thing."

God help us....:eyes:

[ThomCat]

12. Exactly. The defense is trying to get a jury of

Rapid neoconservative loyalists. x(

[aquart]

13. Jury selection has become insane.

I like grand juries. If you're breathing and speak English, you're empaneled.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

14. I didn't think political cherry picking was allowed for juries?

[UTUSN]

15. If Fitz didn't expect it, he's not so sharp as he's said to be n/t

[Trillo]

16. Or he can't do anything about it, perhaps his efforts were undermined,

so he's just letting the public know the "check and balance" of this particular jury was undermined to a great degree.

[halobeam]

17. guess we've been forwarned that this will fall apart.

what a shock. I really counted on justice. right.

[Jackpine Radical]

19. No, your Honor, I have no biases.

I can listen with an open mind and evaluate on their merits any fibs, half-truths or outright lies the despicable Mr. Libby and his boss, Scumbag Cheney, might care to insult us with.

[Miss Chybil]

21. This is like finding 12 people who support the death penalty for

a death penalty case. Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? I mean, everybody will be so "impartial" then, right?

[Mechatanketra]

24. Which is, of course, exactly how the system works.

One of the major reasons, I believe, that capital cases are so messed up, with so many people stuck fallaciously on death row, is that support for the death penalty (or lack thereof) is so closely tied to faith (or lack therof) in the infallibility of The System. If you admit the cops sometimes nab the wrong guy, you're likely to be against the death penalty because it removes the chance to correct those mistakes; hence, if you're not against the death penalty, you most likely don't think it significantly probable that the cops nab the wrong guy. So in the end, the jury ends up stacked with people predisposed to assume the authorities don't make mistakes. In other words, guilty until proven innocent.

Same thing here, of course. Watching polls seriously suggests that there's a ~30% "rocky core" of Republican-by-postulate support — people who simply don't judge their support of the party by the analysis of the facts, but rather determine their analysis of facts by their support of the party. In other words, people who would stick with the party even if GWB ate a baby on TV during the state of the union address. "That baby would have grown up to be a gay terrorist anyways!" The defense strategy, clearly, is to force just ONE of these guys on the jury, and get it hung.

[Miss Chybil]

27. I couldn't agree with you more. nt