We're in the court room, waiting for Judge Walton, who is at a swearing-in ceremony for a former clerk. I think the two sides have got some fights to haggle out this morning. There's also the outstanding question of how much of Scottie's Fall 2003 statements we get. More interesting, we're going to hear Libby's GJ testimony today, hours upon hours of it. Apparently we're going to squabble about whether or not those tapes will be released–a whole bounty of MP3s for people who circulate this kind of thing. Will we be seeing Scooter Libby remixes shortly? Jeffress' one SCOTUS case, Nixon v. TimeWarner, related to the release of tapes, so he is well-practiced in preventing this kind of thing from circulating. But AFAIK, Fitz is not preparing to indict a whole bunch of co-conspirators, which is why Jeffress was able to postpone the release of the Nixon tapes to the press.
Walton is in.
Fitz–first thing is the press videos.
Walton: Saying that he's not convinced that Libby had viewed the briefings. His concern is that those briefings are circulated in ways besides the videos themselves. And, obviously, lots of discussion regarding things. Walton decides that there is no evidence that Libby viewed the videos. And also, this would damage the memory defense, because if Libby were sitting around watching the videos, it might undermine the "theory" of memory. If you have compelling evidence that he did see them. I don't think the evidence is sufficient that he did view them.
Fitz: I'll respectfully disagree, this was a person who paid careful attention. I would suggest we offer the transcripts.
Walton. I don't know how he got it. To give it to the jury in another way other than how :HE got it.
Fitz: He was sent gaggles. Defendant should not be able to say that gov’t is limited to questions asked in grand jury.
Walton: The jury would have to speculate that this was how he had his knowledge.
Fitz: Wells' opening said this was a critical time for him, if someone thinks they're being set up as a scapegoat, to say you can't be put a transcript up about him. What is the unfair prejudice.
Walton: We're talking about the basis for his knowledge is. I'm just not going to permit it. The jury will have GJ testimony, they can glean from that what the basis of his knowledge was. I just think it permits the jury to speculate.
10:48am ET
Walton is in.
Fitz–first thing is the press videos.
Walton: Saying that he's not convinced that Libby had viewed the briefings. His concern is that those briefings are circulated in ways besides the videos themselves. And, obviously, lots of discussion regarding things. Walton decides that there is no evidence that Libby viewed the videos. And also, this would damage the memory defense, because if Libby were sitting around watching the videos, it might undermine the "theory" of memory. If you have compelling evidence that he did see them. I don't think the evidence is sufficient that he did view them.
Fitz: I'll respectfully disagree, this was a person who paid careful attention. I would suggest we offer the transcripts.
Walton. I don't know how he got it. To give it to the jury in another way other than how :HE got it.
Fitz: He was sent gaggles. Defendant should not be able to say that gov’t is limited to questions asked in grand jury.
Walton: The jury would have to speculate that this was how he had his knowledge.
Fitz: Wells' opening said this was a critical time for him, if someone thinks they're being set up as a scapegoat, to say you can't be put a transcript up about him. What is the unfair prejudice.
Walton: We're talking about the basis for his knowledge is. I'm just not going to permit it. The jury will have GJ testimony, they can glean from that what the basis of his knowledge was. I just think it permits the jury to speculate.
10:48am ET
Update 2:
Fitz: Trying to introduce the transcript that was forwarded to Jennie Mayfield. It was an email to the person who takes his email.
Wells: Yes we object to that one also. As your honor indicated, the story WRT Libby's concerns is laid out fully. There's no evidence that Libby reviewed this transcript. What's going on is a feeding frenzy.
Walton: I'm talking about an excerpt.
Wells: I don't have any problem with an excerpt.
Fitz is trying to get in transcript with highlights.
Walton: Unless there's something unduly prejudicial, I think I'd have to agree that the entire transcript gets in. If it was sent to his assistant presumably for him to view, I think it's reasonable to assume he got access to it.
Wells: I'd like to defer. I'd like to read it.
Fitz: We were going to shift to the other statements. [these are the ones that were in response to Libby's attempt to get a statement exonerating him.]
Walton, Clearly it seems to me Mr. McClellan's quote, as a result of Libby's effort to have a statement exonerating Libby. We do have the note also that suggests VP had in fact taken, the action had been taken in response to VP.
Fitz: now making the argument that Libby testified that he wanted to get the statement, and that Addington said Bartlett said they were done at behest of Cheney.
Walton: What is it exactly you want jury to see? Narrative, or responses that would have been given by him.
Fitz: Q&A.
Walton: I guess I'll have to look at it. Maybe the narrative comes in, bc if he's pushing for something to be said. If there're follow-ups,
Fitz: There're two reasons I beg to differ, Libby chose to make McClellan his agent. Libby "hid behind Mr. McClellan to do it" [make the statement].
Walton: It's in effect Libby saying it. Where are the notes indicating what he wanted McClellan to say. Can I see that and then I need to see what you want to show to the jury.
Fitz: Puts Libby's sonnet back up.
Wells: Yes we object to that one also. As your honor indicated, the story WRT Libby's concerns is laid out fully. There's no evidence that Libby reviewed this transcript. What's going on is a feeding frenzy.
Walton: I'm talking about an excerpt.
Wells: I don't have any problem with an excerpt.
Fitz is trying to get in transcript with highlights.
Walton: Unless there's something unduly prejudicial, I think I'd have to agree that the entire transcript gets in. If it was sent to his assistant presumably for him to view, I think it's reasonable to assume he got access to it.
Wells: I'd like to defer. I'd like to read it.
Fitz: We were going to shift to the other statements. [these are the ones that were in response to Libby's attempt to get a statement exonerating him.]
Walton, Clearly it seems to me Mr. McClellan's quote, as a result of Libby's effort to have a statement exonerating Libby. We do have the note also that suggests VP had in fact taken, the action had been taken in response to VP.
Fitz: now making the argument that Libby testified that he wanted to get the statement, and that Addington said Bartlett said they were done at behest of Cheney.
Walton: What is it exactly you want jury to see? Narrative, or responses that would have been given by him.
Fitz: Q&A.
Walton: I guess I'll have to look at it. Maybe the narrative comes in, bc if he's pushing for something to be said. If there're follow-ups,
Fitz: There're two reasons I beg to differ, Libby chose to make McClellan his agent. Libby "hid behind Mr. McClellan to do it" [make the statement].
Walton: It's in effect Libby saying it. Where are the notes indicating what he wanted McClellan to say. Can I see that and then I need to see what you want to show to the jury.
Fitz: Puts Libby's sonnet back up.
More on the Libby trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment