People have probably seen the reports today about the dismissed juror in the Libby Trial.
Jane Hamsher (blogger) has reported live from the trial the following:
Ted Wells [Libby Defense]: It is the position of defense that jury deliberation should continue with a jury of 11 and that at this juncture an alternate should not be put onto the jury, because as we understand it if a new juror is appointed they must start deliberations all over again which is something in our opinion would be prejudicial to Mr. Libby.
My question: Now why would the Defense automatically know in advance that adding one of the alternate jurors would hurt their case-?
Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had asked that Walton call on one of two alternates, both women, who sat through the trial and are on standby. The judge Reggie Walton denied the request.
The juror who was dismissed was an art history expert and scholar who formerly served as a curator of prints at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (who also reported wouldn't wear red on Valentine's day).
From Jane:
Ted Wells is reportedly quite happy with the results, and we hear Mr. Fitzgerald came as close to losing that poker face as he has -- he was evidently quite pissed.
Did they just muscle out, on some technicality, an intelligent and influential juror in the case, who could help ensure a guilty verdict, to rig the results?
I doubt this liberal Art Scholar would have been too fooled by the Libby Defense smoke and mirror show - no doubt she was in the 'convict' column. But if all this came down to was just being "exposed" to some outside media, then why aren't all the jurors sequestered rather than have it left open to "the honor system", and why would they then shorten-up the jury pool rather than replace with one of the alternates who have watched the entire trial from the beginning?
I wonder if Reggie Walton is doing a "judge Ito" here and creating a favorable environment for the Defense (Libby and ultimately Cheney & Bush) to ensure an acquital for Libby.
The fact that Fitzgerald was also visibly upset about this may indicate that his case has been gerry rigged away from him.
Anyone have any more insight into this?