Judge: Libby defense misled court.

[kpete]

“Defense attorneys misled the court into thinking that former White House aide I. Lewis ‘Scooter Libby would testify in his CIA leak trial, a federal judge said Wednesday, as he blocked Libby from using some classified evidence in the case.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/14/judge-libby-defense-misled-court/


Testimony ends in CIA leak trial By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
52 minutes ago

...................

The change in who would testify prompted U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton to reverse course, too. He told defense attorneys that if Libby didn't testify he would not allow some classified information to be presented to the jury as Libby's defense team had planned.

"My absolute understanding was that Mr. Libby was going to testify," Walton said, recalling why he had agreed months ago to allow some classified information into evidence. "My ruling was based on the fact that he was going to testify."

Walton's decision blocked Libby's plans to call three CIA briefers Wednesday to testify about the classified national security issues Libby faced in mid-2003, when CIA operative Valerie Plame was named in the media.

Libby wanted that testimony to bolster his claim that he never lied to investigators but rather forgot details about Plame's exposure because he was consumed by his workload as Cheney's top aide.

more at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_trial;_ylt=AhUknOV6JnuVGy.ZZ.PMEdWyFz4D

[Historic NY]

1. Imagine trying to pull a fast one on the court.................

these Rethugs have no respect for our laws, Constitution or courts they believe there is no law they must abide by.

[kenny blankenship]

2. Will Libby's liars for hire ask for a mistrial?

[LonelyLRLiberal]

23. Judge's statement was made when jury was not there.

So, no cause for mistrial.

[rmgarrette64]

3. Disturbing Ruling

I was sort of under the impression that the right not to testify was pretty absolute. But the judge is now making some elements of Libby's defense contingent on his testifying. I think this is a pretty bad precedent, and absolutely not worth the trade of getting Libby.

Unless, of course, there's something I'm missing (I'm not a fanatic about this case.)

R. Garrett

[kenny blankenship]

5. Guessing that some of this classified stuff includes statements by Libby

so if they are to be introduced as evidence in the trial, he has be prepared to be cross-examined about them. If they were introduced and he was allowed to not take the stand that would be tantamount to being allowed to give testimony without being examined by the prosecution which violates the government's right to an equal chance to make their case.
Just a guess.

This could also be a ploy to create an avenue for appeal by the defense. Some Federal appeals courts are notoriously partisan, having been stuffed with hatchetmen by the Reagan-Bush mafia.

[caligirl]

19. Exactly, Libby team even wanted to show an Imus tape of Andre Mitchell

and introduce enuendo as fact. Fitz referred to the tactic as Imus on evidence replacing the oldest and most relied upon book of rules on admission of evidence, the name escapes me.

[myrna minx]

8. The Libby team dragged their heals,

wasting the court's time by trying to use "grey mail" as well as this silly memory defense.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-17-libby-charges_x.htm

Posted 2/17/2006 9:33 AM Updated 2/17/2006 11:12 AM
Prosecutor says Libby has the evidence he needs
WASHINGTON (AP) — A former White House aide charged in the investigation of the leaking of a CIA operative's identity is seeking access to information that would threaten national security, grand jury secrecy and presidential executive privilege, a prosecutor said in court papers

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15534713/
No memory expert for Libby trial
Judge called proposed key witness a 'waste of time'


Judge Walton allowed some evidence into evidence basically in the contingency that Libby would testify in his own defense. Only Libby could attest to the fact that he "forgot" several conversations he had with people and to explain how he invented out of whole cloth other conversations. Since Libby decided not to testify, the Judge was basically deceived, as well.

[kenny blankenship]

10. I guess Libby just forgot he agreed to testify in exchange for the admission

What a forgetful guy!

[myrna minx]

15. He just plumb forgot.

****That's our Scooter**** coming this fall on FOX. :rofl:

[icnorth]

20. The Fox plan may be a little bit longer range Myrna.

Muggsy murdock figures the scooter might get a state paid vacation; and that being the case, they can still pick him up in a few years to take over Ollie North's war stories segment.;-)

[myrna minx]

32. Heh.

Welcome to DU, icnorth. :hi: The right sure celebrates their felons. :hi:

[rsdsharp]

13. Libby wanted to call the CIA guys, and present the classified

documents to show he was dealing with a lot of stuff, and therefore it was plausible that he forgot just when, and from whom, he he learned about Plame. But to make that testimony, and those exhibits relevant, at some point Libby would have to take the stand and say "I forgot." The judge isn't forcing him to testify, but he doesn't have to, and should not, allow evidence that only has relevance to something only Libby can testify to.

[Zensea]

14. You're missing this

The question was whether classified evidence could be introduced into court.
The rationale was that it would be necessary if Libby testified to have access to the documents and reference them in court.
The judge allowed the documents to be introduced based on the presumption that Libby was going to testify.
Since Libby decided not to testify, the judge thinks there was trickery involved in trying to get the documents introduced and thus withdraws his consent to have them introduced.

He's not saying anything about whether Libby has any requirement to testify, he is simply saying that Libby misled in order to try to get evidence introduced that would not have been allowed to be introduced if it was a given that Libby was not going to testify.

[LonelyLRLiberal]

24. The "defenses" were "I'm so busy" and "bad memory" and "I'm the fallguy."

They never presented one iota of evidence that he was a fallguy.

The ruling excluded evidence of bad memory since the only way to really put in evidence of a bad memory (the charges involve lying to the grand jury and obstruction) is to have the defendant testify. The defense was allowed to put into evidence a whole load of stuff based on the representation or implication that Libby would testify. I think the judge was correct to exclude other testimony that would have just allowed the jury to speculate about Libby's memory.

[Double T]

4. Will these guys EVER stop the deception??????

[in_cog_ni_to]

7. NO. Why should they? It's been working so well for them and NO ONE seems to give a shit.

:(

[Double T]

9. It is unbelievable what THEY get away with...........

[TwilightZone]

12. I opined elsewhere that there is simply so much of it that the public can't keep up.

There is so much corruption, so much bald-faced lying, so much complete bull that even we political junkies can't keep up.

I can see how the general public would get the political equivalent of battle fatigue. New day, new scandal, new lies. I think people simply get overwhelmed and tune it out.

Edit: typo

[blogslut]

22. I give a shit

You give a shit. The judge gives a shit. The court gives a shit. The over one hundred thousands members of DU give a shit. The hundreds of thousands of surfers that have been following this trial via Firedoglake, The Last Hurrah, Talk Left and Huffington Post give a shit.

There's a new media in town and just because the teevee and the newspapers haven't been giving this trial its proper due, please don't think that people aren't paying attention.

[Straight Shooter]

17. Will the sun EVER stop rising in the east?

Will bears ever stop ----- nevermind.

Yes, it's infuriating. :(

[TwilightZone]

6. Damn activist judges...

The nerve of the guy, expecting Libby's lawyers to actually follow through on their stated intentions!

[peacetalksforall]

11. Is it final that Walton will not allow the last minute demand to allow

these documents?

If not, why would Fizgerald close?

If Walton hasn't or doesn't allow the documents, what form would the appeal take?

What other real or concocted reason for an appeal would they use?

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. This was all about stonewalling?

[caligirl]

18. Thanks kpete for getting that up. Here is more on this from Firedoglake

"A persistent catchphrase during the legal arguments in the Scooter Libby trial, as eavesdropped on by emptywheel and myself over the past few weeks, is "state of mind." What was Libby's state of mind during July 2003, as Valerie Plame Wilson was being outed as a CIA employee — was he preoccupied by national-security worries, as the defense claims, or focused intently on combatting the criticisms of Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, as special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to prove?



"In this respect, the tactics of Scooter's legal team have been unintentionally revealing. Just in today's live-blogging, EW has caught Judge Walton's ironic deflection of an argument that an assertion of Tim Russert's lawyer to Fitzgerald shouldn't be accepted at face value: "In the same way that I respect you make accurate representations to me, I trust them." At least I assume Walton was seasoning his words with a heavy dose of sarcasm (or ironic regret), since much of the morning was spent debating the implications and remedies for several moving-target claims made by the defense. And the end of the day offered more of the same, with Fitz showing increasing exasperation at the obvious game-playing and posturing."

AND READ THIS IF YOU READ NOTHING ELSE:

"Consider Team Libby's track record since the opening arguments: A head fake that Scooter's defense would be based on pleading that he was scapegoated in order to protect Karl Rove. Bogus rumors that Rove and Dan Bartlett would be forced to testify. Bogus rumors flat-out assertions by defense lawyers that VP Dick Cheney would testify on Libby's behalf. And even more cynically bogus claims that Libby himself would take the stand, woven into a ploy to introduce a dubious "memory defense" and try for a mistrial by demanding access to large quantities of classified material.

Doesn't all this "go to Libby's state of mind," as the lawyers put it? Obsessed with ends that always seem to justify the means, cutting legal corners without any hint of shame, believing that it's acceptable to say anything in order to win (or at least muddy up) the day's news cycle?

If you ask me, that's the state of mind which got Scooter into this mess, and may yet put him behind bars. "

http://www.firedoglake.com/

[LonelyLRLiberal]

25. Can't wait for closing arguments!

Fitz just blows Wells out of the water - really cuts to the chase. Wells' only strategy is to try to throw in a bunch of crap and see if any sticks.

[caligirl]

26. obfuscation elevated to an all new high under Wells. Rove must be

his puppetmeister.

[LonelyLRLiberal]

27. Didn't I read on firedoglake that Wells is actually a Democrat?

Of course, when you don't have a factual defense to the charges, your only option is to obfuscate, muddy, "look, a bright, shiny thing!" and the like.

Thanks to someone at firedoglake for "bright, shiny thing" - can't remember who said it first.

[MissWaverly]

21. Good gracious, he forgot to testify

after his lawyer said he would testify to allow the Judge to admit classified information as evidence, he needs to tie a string around his finger to remind him of his "to do" list.

;-)

[TheModernTerrorist]

28. Liiiibby!!!!

You got some 'splainin to do!!!

[133724]

29. DUP

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x212327

[unblock]

30. forgetting to testify PROVES HE'S NOT GUILTY!

it's a brilliant strategy! it proves just how amazingly forgetful libby is, which in turn proves that he didn't lie, he merely forgot!

brilliant!!

:sarcasm:

[lonestarnot]

31. Neener neener neener! Cheaters never win! heh heh heh!