Libby Trial Decorum Order Issued

By Jeralyn, Section Lewis Libby Indictment
Posted on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 11:30:58 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Judge Reggie Walton has issued the following trial decorum order (pdf) for the Scooter Libby trial. There will be two overflow courtrooms.

Also, from another order granting the following persons 24 hour access to the courthouse during the trial, here's a clue as to who's on the Government's trial team (some could be agents and paralegals in addition to lawyers.).

ORDER as to I. LEWIS LIBBY granting the following individuals access to the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse 24 hours a day/7 days per week from the date of the Order until the conclusion of the trial of this matter: Patrick Fitzgerald, Peter Zeidenberg, Kathleen Kedian, Debra Bonamici, Debbie Bond, Gerard Francisco, Jared Richards, Katie Hance, Bonnie Hansen, and Harry Brady.

< Breaking: Dems Choose Denver for 2008 Convention | Drug War Hurts U.S. Asparagus Growers >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Libby Trial Decorum Order Issued | 6 comments (6 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Rove (2.00 / 1) (#2)
by Fredo on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 03:47:14 PM EST

Look, isn't it well known throughout the most elite circles on the Left that Karl Rove was secretly indicted last May 13? According to a number of impeccable sources, including without limitation Jason Leopold and the oaf Larry Johnson, the indictment was sealed pending Rove's cooperation with Fitz, in which he was going to roll over on the archfiend Cheney himself. So far as Fredo is aware, this story has never been refuted or retracted. So what's the deal? When is the indictment going to be unsealed, and when is the antichrist Rove going to be frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs? Surely the faithful readership at this site must be dialed in to the very latest. So please let us know...

: we've all been aware of this since jump (none / 0) (#3)
by scribe on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 05:32:41 PM EST

but there's no point in going on and on about it when the preconditions you impliedly claim to be necessary - trial of Scooter (if you'd followed it back then, you'd remember that Rover's cooperation was a to be big part of it) haven't happened yet. I kinda doubt Rover's on anyone's witness list, thought.
And, remember, too, that Rover's lawyer denied explicitly the existence of an indictment, a deal, and a roll-over. Also, remember that after the indictment didn't come down - and I remember it well, 'cause I had the right day in the Rover indictment pool, just no indictment - Rover went on his campaign rampage of smear, sling and spout. Up until then, he was pretty meek, thank you. So, FWIW, I think it sorta likely Rover managed to skate on the indictment because he might not have been so vigorous in the campaign had one been hanging over his head.
That said, I'd still like to see the piece of paper Gold Bars Luskin said Fitz had given saying "no indictment" - all we have so far is Luskin's say so which, given who and what his client is, isn't enough to satisfy me.

Rove (2.00 / 1) (#4)
by Fredo on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 07:10:47 PM EST

I'm a little disappointed. The "secret indictment" fantasy was one of my very favorite Moonbat delusions, and I was hoping it was still causing doltish leftwing hearts to flutter. Evidently some skepticism has crept in, which is too bad, because a sudden, crushing disappointment when the GJ is dismissed would have been particularly delightful.

: It appears that your... (none / 0) (#5)
by Edger on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 07:21:57 PM EST

...delusions about liberals are held a little too dogmatically. The perhaps painful thing is - if you abandon them you'll become one.
"The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment."
--Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell (1.00 / 1) (#6)
by Fredo on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 08:57:58 PM EST

My favorite Bertrand Russell story is the one--told by the man himself--about arriving in the Orient and having some Asian person reach out to touch his wife. He confessed that he was appalled--appalled, mind you!--that a fellow of another race would presume to touch his lily-white spouse. (He went on, natch, to confess appropriate white liberal guilt about his natural impulse.)

I also delight in recalling his essays from the early 1960's, in which he declared that John Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev were absolutely indistinguishable in their wickedness.

How do the TalkLefters feel about ban-the-bomb-Bertie's assertion? Do you feel that there was, or was not, any moral basis upon which to distinguish John F. Kennedy from Nikita Khrushchev? How many of you feel confident that you even understand the question?

interesting provisions of the decorum order (none / 0) (#1)
by scribe on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 12:44:46 PM EST

paragraph 3 (A)(iii): providing seats for overflow defense counsel - would that the average capital murder case in, well, anywhere had to worry about having so many defense counsel that they had to assign overflow seats to them.

paragraph 5(A): I think this is the first time I've ever seen a court order with the word "blogging" in it, let alone putting blogging on a par with other reporters....