With opening statements in his trial just hours away, Rod Blagojevich makes a last-ditch effort to throw out his case that is an “improper criminalization of his rights under the First Amendment,” according to a filing.
“In this case, the defendant was engaged in political speech and expression. The government alleges that the political process in which he was engaged was criminal. This is a violation of the defendant’s rights of freedom of speech and expression afforded him under the United States constitution,” the filing reads.
The idea that Blagojevich was just talking politics when he was captured on undercover recordings in the case is expected to be a key theme today in the opening statement of lawyer Sam Adam Jr.
“This prosecution violates fundamental free speech,” the motion states. “The marketplace of ideas is critical to Democracy.” […]
The defense motion states that Blagojevich never formed the intent to commit a crime and had “the right to vigorously debate about different options for appointments and different fundraising strategies.”
Yeah, talking about extorting bribes, kickbacks, etc. is all protected speech. Right. Good luck with that one.
The attorneys also filed a motion seeking permission to question one of the prosecution’s key witnesses, Stuart Levine, about matters the judge has ruled out of bounds. They also want the judge to toss out a count that claims Blagojevich made false statements to federal agents.
Heading into the courthouse, Blagojevich told reporters that prosecutors “hid the truth and are keeping it in a locked box.”
BGA’s Andy Shaw just announced on WBEZ’s 848 that Rod will be going with the “Advice of Counsel” defense; that anything he said he did on advice of counsel who was in the room and so that makes it okay.
[ *** End of Update 1 *** ]
* The public is lining up for tickets for today’s opening statements like it’s a major rock concert…
Spectators were reportedly out on Dearborn Street at 4 a.m.
All of the tickets to the courtroom were dispensed by 7:30 a.m. […]
As far as supporters bearing signs of support, haven’t seen any.
Well, almost like a rock concert. They’re in it for the spectacle, not for love.
In his first public appearance since jury selection began in the Blagojevich trial last week, Quinn said voters will understand that he’s always been an “independent guy.” Quinn noted that he pushed to get a recall provision added to the ballot two years ago.
“I was the one who led the effort for recall, and Gov. Blagojevich opposed me when I was trying to get recall on the ballot in 2008,” Quinn said. “I think he would have been recalled if that happened. But, we got it done for 2010, so this year people get a chance to vote for recall. I think in a a lot of ways that is one of the key reforms that came out of what happened during his time.”
During the 2006 campaign, then-Lt. Gov. Quinn defended Blagojevich, who already was beset by corruption investigations into his administration.
“In all my interactions with him, I’ve found him to be an honest person,” Quinn said at the time.
Since then, Quinn has refused to apologize for defending Blagojevich during the 2006 campaign.
*** UPDATE 2 *** From the indispensable Natasha Korecki, we get these admonishments from Judge Zagel to Rod Blagojevich. No tweeting and watch your mouth, stupid…
“I do not anybody in the well of the court using twitter during trial,” Zagel said.
The judge also warned Blagojevich that public statements he’s made before some days and on radio and television could come back to haunt him.
“You do get to a certain point in time where if you make a lot of statements. . . and you wind up testifying on the witness stand,” questions that have to do with “impeachment” might arise, Zagel said. “There is a risk . . . by repeated public statements outside the courtroom.”
They include a legal assistant in her 20s, an African-American public school math teacher, a retired director for a state public health department and an accounting student from Western Illinois University.
And here’s some video of the disgraced former governor before today’s proceedings…
*** UPDATE 3 *** Once again, Korecki comes through. Here’s the jury…
103, a quiet-spoken woman in her 20s who works as a full-time legal assistant
105, an African-American woman who teaches math to sixth- and seventh-graders in public school; her husband is a state probation officer
106, a female retired director for state public health department who has served on two juries before
115, a blond woman in her 30s or 40s who has worked in retail for the past 15 years; a fan of boating and gardening, she reads news “only for the weather”
119, a mother in her late 20s or early 30s who works in investment accounting and is an avid runner
121, a female accounting student at Western Illinois with an interest in law; her father is a police officer
123, a male human resources manager in his 30s who volunteers for family shelter and has done volunteer work for political candidates
127, a woman in 50s or 60s who likes reading and crafts like knitting and cross-stitch.
128, a young community college student and former Best Buy salesman who likes sports, videogames and hanging out with his friends
133, a man who has had a hip replacement and was concerned about sitting for long periods
135, a man in his 60s who said he was born in a Japanese internment camp in California
137, a retired Navyman who works full-time
148, an African-American, church-going man who worked as a letter carrier for 30 years; has served on two juries in the past, one of which did not reach a verdict.
151, a mechanical engineer with a graduate degree who supervises a crew of 30 at a steel company
153, female secretary/paralegal in the real estate department of a law firm
155, a secretary at Northwestern Memorial Hospital who volunteers at her church
156, young women who works in direct mail marketing and likes spending time with her boyfriend and her dog
166, a female, African-American social worker for a nursing home with a college degree
* Roundup…
* Video of Blagojevich leaving the federal building yesterday
* Blagojevich trial: Opening statements will be a study in contrast: As courtroom styles go, it is hard to imagine a more stark contrast than the ones that will be on display Tuesday when prosecution and defense lawyers make their opening statements in the federal corruption trial of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Think Joe Friday versus Chris Rock.
Can not wait to tell the truth-listen to the tapes etc.–maybe having some second thoughts or in Blago’s case first thoughts
- Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:09 am:
If there is video of Quinn with this and his other Alfred E. Neumann “What, Me Worry?” defenses of Blago 4 years ago, it will make good campaign fodder in the coming months. Of course, Quinn will have no shortage of gaffes from his esteemed opponent to counter with.
Quinn said voters will understand that he’s always been an “independent guy.”
The Governor seems to not fully understand what the word, “always” means here.
It is an adverb which is defined “at all times”. In 2002, the Governor hooked up with Rod Blagojevich as his running mate. How independant was that move? When the Governor championed Rod Blagojevich between the years 2002 to 2009, how independant was he then? When the Governor endorsed Rod Blagojevich twice for his party’s nomination, and endorsed Rod Blagojevich twice to be elected as Governor, how independant was Mr. Quinn?
“Always” is an word which is also defined as “forever”. Except for his endorsement of increasing our taxes, what part of forever is Mr. Quinn referring to here? Was Mr. Quinn forever representing the type of quality government with which he established his political personnae? Was the Governor “always” seeking the truth within the most corrupt gubernatorial administration in Illinois history?
What the Governor seems to be saying is that he believes that the citizens of Illinois will remember how he had, at one time, stood for good government. How he had, at one time, fought for them as a people’s champion. Well, we do remember.
What we want to know is what happened to that guy? Where did he go? At what point did the Governor sell his soul to attain the highest elected position in Illinois? What we want to know is at what price did Pat Quinn sell out? How could he have just sat next to Rod Blagojevich for all those years and not “always” be the independent man he claimed he was?
No - the Governor doesn’t understand the meaning of the word, just as he doesn’t understand the meaning of the words:
“strength”
“courage”
“leadership”
“accountability”
I renew my call for a question of the day on how many years he gets in jail and when he gets released.
- 32nd Ward Roscoe Village - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:34 am:
BGA’s Andy Shaw just announced on WBEZ’s 848 that Rod will be going with the “Advice of Counsel” defense; that anything he said he did on advice of counsel who was in the room and so that makes it okay.
- Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:40 am:
- I renew my call for a question of the day on how many years he gets in jail and when he gets released. -
VMan, your self-righteousness is more annoying than usual today.
That is because the news has been so damn annoying. Since Friday I have been deluged with stupid mistakes made by people trying to get on our good side, or hide their fannies from the public paddle. It is easy to feel self-righteous when our public leaders are exposed as so bumbling.
However, I’ll attempt to curb it. Thanks for the heads up.
I hadn’t realized that our former President was indicted for any crimes in this country.
My understanding of the current issue is that RB, currently under indictiment and standing trial may now invoke “advice of counsel” as a defense. Please compare that scenario line for line with one involving our former president.
I dunno, George, those look like rule followers to me.
- Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:08 pm:
I dunno, Rich, one of them is an avid runner…I am guessing, however, that the guy born in the internment camp probably isn’t a huge fan of corrupt politicians.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:16 pm:
@Vanillaman -
You seem to be following Dick Cheney’s “Never let the facts get in the way of a good story” advice.
How exactly did Pat Quinn “hook up” with Rod as his running mate? That was the choice of voters, not Quinn. BTW, the Democratic ticket got about a quarter million more votes that year the the GOP, so if you wanna blame someone, blame the voters.
How exactly did Quinn “champion” Blagojevich from 2002 to 2009? When, in fact, did he even endorse him? I don’t recall Pat Quinn endorsing Blagojevich in either the 2002 or 2006 Democratic primaries.
As for Blagojevich representing the “most corrupt gubernatorial administration in Illinois history,” you obviously don’t know your history. Blagojevich was corrupt, deserved to be impeached, deserves to go to jail, but I’m not even sure he makes the Top 5 list for corruption in Illinois.
In fact, Rich Miller has made a pretty compelling case that title belongs to Republican Governor Len Small.
I’d probably put Otto Kerner in the #2 slot.
#3 is tough, but Jim Thompson is a pretty good candidate. Although he was well-liked and still is, Thompson inspired the Rutan decision after issuing and executive order which essential required that only Republicans and those who took Republican loyalty oaths could be hired for ANY of 60,000 state jobs. That unparalleled abuse of power was struck down by federal courts.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:20 pm:
@Rich and George -
I don’t see anyone on the list who fits the defense’s ideal of “works for tips and cheats on their taxes” model.
If I were the defense, I’d be freaked out about having any public employees or family members of public employees on the jury. Rod has given all government employees a bad rap through his actions, and has repeatedly blamed public employees for all of government’s failures.
The motion from the defense is interesting as it indicates a concession that blago said what the feds claim he said. i.e. they are not denying the comments if they are tyring to say it was ok to make them.
The massive gaping hole in that defense is Monks purported testimony that there was a scheme hatched before the gov took office which would generate spoils to be divided after he left…. not even remotely political speech start with that foundation and it makes all other wheeling suspect, is this deal for a job for patti/money for blago, orjust political wheelng and dealing.
IMHO, that is a good jury or the prosecution given the allegations of the complaint. To me, the ideal defense witness is thehead of a large corp or someone who likely has heir own questionabl deals floating around.
The dir of an agency, and other public employees forced to deal with bad hires, loss of funding etc from “political” dealing I suspect are not going to e supportive of this is they way the world works, they will see this as an opportunity to show that such workings should not occur.
The list looks like a well rounded assortment of citizens with backgrounds, gender and age mixes.
I think a current employee would leave open possible problems, but the woman with an employed husband I will assume the judge felt could still be fair and impartial in her sitting. This judge does not appear to take things lightly.
- preservationist - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:33 pm:
With regard to the list of potential Blogo trial jurors, it is particularly interesting and revealing that the potential juror’s race is mentioned only in the case of African Americans and indirectly for #135. “White” is normal and transparent. Everything else is a deviation. We’re still a racist society. What a shame–but no surprise.
It’s curious how so many professional people were placed on the jury.
Usually lawyers pick people who can be overcome with their charisma and style rather than the facts and the law.
It’s EXTREMELY rare that engineers are accepted onto juries. Jury members educated in logic and dispassionate reason usually scare the bejeebers out of lawyers.
the real question is which juror is most likely to cause a deadlock and create a mistrial.
It only takes one to keep blago out of the slammer.
I’d put my money on 106, 148, or 155. They have ties to government bureaucracy and church backgrounds that may make them tend to “hate the sin, love the sinner”, and Blago has that “revival” tenor when he speaks.
I agree YDD, about state employees (even former ones). I think any juror who may have taken the state ethics “test,” or has a family member who did, is not someone the Defense wants on the panel.
=== They want that emotional appeal for the schoolteacher, the avid runner, the seniors riding for free, the social worker, the steel plant employee….====
The teacher faced with no resources and low salariesbecause the Gov was qui pro quoing away state money for his benefit?
The avid runner who pays taxes Blago passed to outside vendors in exchange for money?
The senior living on a fixed income watching the Gov place state moneyin in shady investments for a piece of the action?
The social worker protectin children hearing about the shakedonw of a childrens hopsital? or forced to try and get medical care for children most doctors wont see because all kids coverage is so bad?
The steel plant employee who has to earn every dime he makes watching a guy who spent is days at home selling state jobs for personal gain?
None ofthose folks are going to praise blago, they will bury him. They all look like folks who had to work and hard for what they have, they will not be open to blago’s way of money for nothing.
As a state employee I have taken the “ethics test” many times. It would be hard to see any other state employee being overly sympathetic to RB. YDD is right on the mark - RB lambasted state employees regularly. He didn’t endear himself to us when he concocted that ethics test. However, it has done some good. It will make sure that the state employees on the jury will know darn well just what laws RB broke. Thanks for the pointers!
I’m thinking #123 is Blago’s ace in the hole. No offense to my own friends who are lawyers but most people I know who work for them don’t necessarily like them. Especially if you are at the larger, stuffy law firms. Since he is in Human Relations, it must be at a larger firm that has that type of position. He will relate the Fed lawyers with those lawyers at his employer, more than he will the Adams Family, and that is not a good thing.
Interesting group but jury selecting is always something of a crapshoot. Sometimes the one you were concerned about turns out to be your champion. Sometimes the other way around. In reality you don’t so much “pick” a jury as you eliminate the ones that scare you the most and are left with the rest. When you are “picking” for one side,the the choices the other side makes is sometimes puzzling. Sometimes a “strategy” works, sometimes not.
Interesting approach in the courtroom - I have read two instances now (following tweets, etc.) of the prosecution saying Blago & co. steered money to the campaign fund to be used later by Rod for his personal benefit.
Of course there is a skill to it. My point was it is a very inexact science and sometimes the impression you get of a person during the selection process turns out to be inaccurate. Sometimes because you didn’t ask the right question and sometimes because they weren’t entirely candid. I’m not trying to minimize the effort or skill involved. I’m just saying that coming to conclusions about who is favorable to which side based on a few facts about the juror is really just rank speculation. Having picked many juries over the years I find those comments kind of annoying.
- Cindy Lou - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 9:55 am:
I’m amazed that a current DCFS worker would be in the consideration for jury.
- Madame Defarge - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 9:55 am:
Can not wait to tell the truth-listen to the tapes etc.–maybe having some second thoughts or in Blago’s case first thoughts
- Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:09 am:
If there is video of Quinn with this and his other Alfred E. Neumann “What, Me Worry?” defenses of Blago 4 years ago, it will make good campaign fodder in the coming months. Of course, Quinn will have no shortage of gaffes from his esteemed opponent to counter with.
- Justice - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:09 am:
He’s in court, trial set to start.
It’s an Up Day for me!
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:10 am:
Quinn said voters will understand that he’s always been an “independent guy.”
The Governor seems to not fully understand what the word, “always” means here.
It is an adverb which is defined “at all times”. In 2002, the Governor hooked up with Rod Blagojevich as his running mate. How independant was that move? When the Governor championed Rod Blagojevich between the years 2002 to 2009, how independant was he then? When the Governor endorsed Rod Blagojevich twice for his party’s nomination, and endorsed Rod Blagojevich twice to be elected as Governor, how independant was Mr. Quinn?
“Always” is an word which is also defined as “forever”. Except for his endorsement of increasing our taxes, what part of forever is Mr. Quinn referring to here? Was Mr. Quinn forever representing the type of quality government with which he established his political personnae? Was the Governor “always” seeking the truth within the most corrupt gubernatorial administration in Illinois history?
What the Governor seems to be saying is that he believes that the citizens of Illinois will remember how he had, at one time, stood for good government. How he had, at one time, fought for them as a people’s champion. Well, we do remember.
What we want to know is what happened to that guy? Where did he go? At what point did the Governor sell his soul to attain the highest elected position in Illinois? What we want to know is at what price did Pat Quinn sell out? How could he have just sat next to Rod Blagojevich for all those years and not “always” be the independent man he claimed he was?
No - the Governor doesn’t understand the meaning of the word, just as he doesn’t understand the meaning of the words:
“strength”
“courage”
“leadership”
“accountability”
- shore - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:33 am:
I renew my call for a question of the day on how many years he gets in jail and when he gets released.
- 32nd Ward Roscoe Village - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:34 am:
BGA’s Andy Shaw just announced on WBEZ’s 848 that Rod will be going with the “Advice of Counsel” defense; that anything he said he did on advice of counsel who was in the room and so that makes it okay.
- Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:40 am:
- I renew my call for a question of the day on how many years he gets in jail and when he gets released. -
Rich did that already, I think last week.
- Carl Nyberg - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:40 am:
George W. Bush and Dick Cheney evaded prosecution by invoking the “advice of counsel” defense.
Patrick Fitzgerald didn’t seem to have his heart in going after Cheney’s team the way he’s gone after Blagojevich.
Was there a pre-prosecution press conference attacking the Bush administration?
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 10:41 am:
VMan, your self-righteousness is more annoying than usual today.
Blago’s throwing spaghetti at the fridge, seeing what will stick. He’s in deep stuff.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 11:01 am:
VMan, your self-righteousness is more annoying than usual today.
That is because the news has been so damn annoying. Since Friday I have been deluged with stupid mistakes made by people trying to get on our good side, or hide their fannies from the public paddle. It is easy to feel self-righteous when our public leaders are exposed as so bumbling.
However, I’ll attempt to curb it. Thanks for the heads up.
- dupage dan - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 11:04 am:
Mr Nyberg,
I hadn’t realized that our former President was indicted for any crimes in this country.
My understanding of the current issue is that RB, currently under indictiment and standing trial may now invoke “advice of counsel” as a defense. Please compare that scenario line for line with one involving our former president.
- Say WHAT? - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 11:54 am:
I can’t help but think he would have been better off had he remained in fetal position, unable to speak.
- George - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 11:56 am:
The Blago jury has been listed.
A cursory look at this superficial summary shows a jury that the defense is probably very happy with.
Unlikely that it will matter, but…
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:01 pm:
I dunno, George, those look like rule followers to me.
- Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:08 pm:
I dunno, Rich, one of them is an avid runner…I am guessing, however, that the guy born in the internment camp probably isn’t a huge fan of corrupt politicians.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:16 pm:
@Vanillaman -
You seem to be following Dick Cheney’s “Never let the facts get in the way of a good story” advice.
How exactly did Pat Quinn “hook up” with Rod as his running mate? That was the choice of voters, not Quinn. BTW, the Democratic ticket got about a quarter million more votes that year the the GOP, so if you wanna blame someone, blame the voters.
How exactly did Quinn “champion” Blagojevich from 2002 to 2009? When, in fact, did he even endorse him? I don’t recall Pat Quinn endorsing Blagojevich in either the 2002 or 2006 Democratic primaries.
As for Blagojevich representing the “most corrupt gubernatorial administration in Illinois history,” you obviously don’t know your history. Blagojevich was corrupt, deserved to be impeached, deserves to go to jail, but I’m not even sure he makes the Top 5 list for corruption in Illinois.
In fact, Rich Miller has made a pretty compelling case that title belongs to Republican Governor Len Small.
I’d probably put Otto Kerner in the #2 slot.
#3 is tough, but Jim Thompson is a pretty good candidate. Although he was well-liked and still is, Thompson inspired the Rutan decision after issuing and executive order which essential required that only Republicans and those who took Republican loyalty oaths could be hired for ANY of 60,000 state jobs. That unparalleled abuse of power was struck down by federal courts.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:20 pm:
@Rich and George -
I don’t see anyone on the list who fits the defense’s ideal of “works for tips and cheats on their taxes” model.
If I were the defense, I’d be freaked out about having any public employees or family members of public employees on the jury. Rod has given all government employees a bad rap through his actions, and has repeatedly blamed public employees for all of government’s failures.
- Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:24 pm:
The motion from the defense is interesting as it indicates a concession that blago said what the feds claim he said. i.e. they are not denying the comments if they are tyring to say it was ok to make them.
The massive gaping hole in that defense is Monks purported testimony that there was a scheme hatched before the gov took office which would generate spoils to be divided after he left…. not even remotely political speech
start with that foundation and it makes all other wheeling suspect, is this deal for a job for patti/money for blago, orjust political wheelng and dealing.
IMHO, that is a good jury or the prosecution given the allegations of the complaint. To me, the ideal defense witness is thehead of a large corp or someone who likely has heir own questionabl deals floating around.
The dir of an agency, and other public employees forced to deal with bad hires, loss of funding etc from “political” dealing I suspect are not going to e supportive of this is they way the world works, they will see this as an opportunity to show that such workings should not occur.
- George - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:32 pm:
I guess I should correct myself - not necessarily people the WHOLE defense team would be happy with, but definitely Blago and Junior.
They want that emotional appeal for the schoolteacher, the avid runner, the seniors riding for free, the social worker, the steel plant employee….
etc.
- Cindy Lou - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:33 pm:
The list looks like a well rounded assortment of citizens with backgrounds, gender and age mixes.
I think a current employee would leave open possible problems, but the woman with an employed husband I will assume the judge felt could still be fair and impartial in her sitting. This judge does not appear to take things lightly.
- preservationist - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:33 pm:
With regard to the list of potential Blogo trial jurors, it is particularly interesting and revealing that the potential juror’s race is mentioned only in the case of African Americans and indirectly for #135. “White” is normal and transparent. Everything else is a deviation. We’re still a racist society. What a shame–but no surprise.
- PalosParkBob - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:39 pm:
It’s curious how so many professional people were placed on the jury.
Usually lawyers pick people who can be overcome with their charisma and style rather than the facts and the law.
It’s EXTREMELY rare that engineers are accepted onto juries. Jury members educated in logic and dispassionate reason usually scare the bejeebers out of lawyers.
the real question is which juror is most likely to cause a deadlock and create a mistrial.
It only takes one to keep blago out of the slammer.
I’d put my money on 106, 148, or 155. They have ties to government bureaucracy and church backgrounds that may make them tend to “hate the sin, love the sinner”, and Blago has that “revival” tenor when he speaks.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:46 pm:
I agree YDD, about state employees (even former ones). I think any juror who may have taken the state ethics “test,” or has a family member who did, is not someone the Defense wants on the panel.
- George - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:48 pm:
Here is another list from the Tribune with slightly different descriptions.
- Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 12:53 pm:
=== They want that emotional appeal for the schoolteacher, the avid runner, the seniors riding for free, the social worker, the steel plant employee….====
The teacher faced with no resources and low salariesbecause the Gov was qui pro quoing away state money for his benefit?
The avid runner who pays taxes Blago passed to outside vendors in exchange for money?
The senior living on a fixed income watching the Gov place state moneyin in shady investments for a piece of the action?
The social worker protectin children hearing about the shakedonw of a childrens hopsital? or forced to try and get medical care for children most doctors wont see because all kids coverage is so bad?
The steel plant employee who has to earn every dime he makes watching a guy who spent is days at home selling state jobs for personal gain?
None ofthose folks are going to praise blago, they will bury him. They all look like folks who had to work and hard for what they have, they will not be open to blago’s way of money for nothing.
- dupage dan - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 1:11 pm:
As a state employee I have taken the “ethics test” many times. It would be hard to see any other state employee being overly sympathetic to RB. YDD is right on the mark - RB lambasted state employees regularly. He didn’t endear himself to us when he concocted that ethics test. However, it has done some good. It will make sure that the state employees on the jury will know darn well just what laws RB broke. Thanks for the pointers!
- Been There - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 1:17 pm:
I’m thinking #123 is Blago’s ace in the hole. No offense to my own friends who are lawyers but most people I know who work for them don’t necessarily like them. Especially if you are at the larger, stuffy law firms. Since he is in Human Relations, it must be at a larger firm that has that type of position. He will relate the Fed lawyers with those lawyers at his employer, more than he will the Adams Family, and that is not a good thing.
- girllawyer - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 1:47 pm:
Interesting group but jury selecting is always something of a crapshoot. Sometimes the one you were concerned about turns out to be your champion. Sometimes the other way around. In reality you don’t so much “pick” a jury as you eliminate the ones that scare you the most and are left with the rest. When you are “picking” for one side,the the choices the other side makes is sometimes puzzling. Sometimes a “strategy” works, sometimes not.
- George - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 2:17 pm:
Interesting approach in the courtroom - I have read two instances now (following tweets, etc.) of the prosecution saying Blago & co. steered money to the campaign fund to be used later by Rod for his personal benefit.
Umm… would that have even been possible?
- Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 2:34 pm:
George, one of the best kept secrets…. campaign loans money to the individual…. who never repays it
- Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 2:37 pm:
Girllawyer while anything is possible, there isa skill to picking a jury and the really good attorneys tend to bemore on then not.
part of that is knowing your audience after they are selected and you are putting on your case.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 2:56 pm:
The prosecution has completed its opening statement. Ugh…this will be a long, painful summer.
- girllawyer - Tuesday, Jun 8, 10 @ 5:04 pm:
Of course there is a skill to it. My point was it is a very inexact science and sometimes the impression you get of a person during the selection process turns out to be inaccurate. Sometimes because you didn’t ask the right question and sometimes because they weren’t entirely candid. I’m not trying to minimize the effort or skill involved. I’m just saying that coming to conclusions about who is favorable to which side based on a few facts about the juror is really just rank speculation. Having picked many juries over the years I find those comments kind of annoying.
- Ghost - Wednesday, Jun 9, 10 @ 8:30 am:
Ahh I see. You do realise that part of the fun of blogging a trial is looking at the peices we have and discssing our views.
I have picked many many federal juries over the years myself, and I find such analysis and debate to be enjoyable