The jurors in the Lewis “Scooter” Libby trial have adjourned after seven days of deliberations. They have asked for clarification from the judge as to the nature of the crime alleged by the prosecutors and, most recently, the meaning of “reasonable doubt.” They asked if the prosecution would have to prove that it is not humanly possible for someone to forget such a conversation in order to meet its burden of proof. This highlights some of the absurdity of the Libby trial: absent proof (emails, phone calls, testimony from other people regarding lying) of deliberate intent to deceive, why is there a trial?
The jury also requested a dictionary; the judge refused the common request, as ordinary words can have legal meaning. He stated that he would respond to any specific request for clarification. The pachyderm is unsure of the reasons for not providing a Black’s Law Dictionary, which would present words in their legal setting. Regardless, the responses from the judge are sure to provide fodder for an appeal, if it comes to that.
Seven days later, the Libby jury has yet to render a verdict. One can only hope that some jurors there are wondering why there is even a trial to begin with, as Mr. Libby is certainly not guilty of any thing that resemebles a crime.