Showing posts with label Blagojevich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blagojevich. Show all posts
Blagojevich juror: "It was like, ‘Here’s a manual, go fly the space shuttle."
The work was too complicated!
The linked NYT article seems to be written around the theme that if only the prosecutor had simplified the case and concentrated on the charge of selling the Senate seat, Blagojevich would have been convicted on a corruption charge. If that's the case, then, on retrial, the prosecutors know what to do. Won't they win?
Consider what the defense has learned. Even though only one juror held out, she held out for a long time, under great pressure. The other jurors clearly respect her. She was "very noble." On retrial, the defense will, I presume, try to make all the jurors feel the doubt she did. Was it not reasonable doubt?
Jurors said it took them several days just to figure out how to begin to break down their assignment into manageable tasks — not to mention how to understand the legal terminology (what exactly is conspiracy to commit extortion?). These were early hints of the multiple stumbling blocks they would find as they struggled, but failed, over 14 days of deliberations, to reach a verdict on any of the counts but one.You know, when someone is blabbing a lot dreamy thoughts, it might add up to a whole bunch of nothing. Wait. I got distracted. We're still talking about Blagojevich, right?
It also became clear early on that some jurors believed that much of Mr. Blagojevich’s crass political talk — captured in hours of secretly recorded phone calls — amounted to dreamy thoughts of what he might gain, not criminal demands.
“A lot of it came down to, ‘What was his intent?’ ” [Steve] Wlodek said. “You could infer something if you looked at it one way, or not if you looked another.”That's reasonable doubt. Didn't you at least get the memo that when there's reasonable doubt, you're supposed to find the defendant not guilty?
After initial frustration and confusion upon arriving in the deliberation room with little sense of what to do next, the jurors laid out a plan.Good for them. There must have a been a temptation to look at the whole big tangle and make an intuitive guess that he's a crook, then try to see where the actual crimes are. Ah, but that's sort of what they did. Read the linked article. The votes kept splitting over all the crimes except the charge Blagojevich tried to sell the Senate seat. On that one, there was a lone holdout. None of the jurors will reveal who this person was, except to say that she was one of the women.
On large sheets of paper, they wrote down crimes Mr. Blagojevich was accused of committing, and taped each one on the walls around the room. On the sheets: a claim that he had sought political contributions in exchange for legislation to help a local pediatric hospital; another that he had sought a political fund-raising event in exchange for state financing for a school; another that he had sought payments for a law that would benefit the horse racing industry; and so on.
Mr. Wlodek described her stance as “very noble,” adding: “She did not see it as a violation of any laws. It was politics. It was more of conversations of what-ifs.”If it were a play, she'd gradually win the rest of them over.
The linked NYT article seems to be written around the theme that if only the prosecutor had simplified the case and concentrated on the charge of selling the Senate seat, Blagojevich would have been convicted on a corruption charge. If that's the case, then, on retrial, the prosecutors know what to do. Won't they win?
Consider what the defense has learned. Even though only one juror held out, she held out for a long time, under great pressure. The other jurors clearly respect her. She was "very noble." On retrial, the defense will, I presume, try to make all the jurors feel the doubt she did. Was it not reasonable doubt?
Labels:
Blagojevich,
evidence,
law
"The president-elect would be very pleased if you appointed Valerie and he would be, uh, thankful and appreciative."
"They're not willing to give me anything but appreciation -- f--- them." Blagojevich. The trial continues.
After Barack Obama friend Valerie Jarrett publicly pulled out of contention for the U.S. Senate seat appointment, Rahm Emanuel... wanted Blagojevich to know the list of Senate candidates "acceptable" to Obama, according to testimony Thursday in Blagojevich's corruption trial.
They were: Tammy Duckworth; Illinois state comptroller Dan Hynes; U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. and U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, according to Blagojevich's former chief of staff John Harris.
Harris told the ex-governor of the discussion in a secretly recorded phone call Nov. 12.
On the call, Blagojevich calls the list "B.S."
Harris testified the former governor believed Obama's list to be political cover.
"If that became public, the president-elect would want the list to represent a diverse group of individuals," Harris explained from the stand.
Labels:
Blagojevich,
Blagosmear on Obama,
law,
Valerie Jarrett
Sestak/Romanoff/Blagojevich...
Things going on at the same time.
[A] second Democrat has come forward to confirm that the Obama administration dangled high-ranking government jobs in an attempt to move him out of a challenge to a Democratic incumbent senator.
Andrew Romanoff, a former state legislator in Colorado, said Wednesday evening that deputy White House chief of staff Jim Messina said three separate government jobs “might be available to me were I not pursuing the Senate race.”
Also Thursday, the corruption trial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich will begin in Chicago. The proceedings will last several months and have begun to gain notice in the press because of the potential for embarrassing information about the president or some of his top advisers – chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, top advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett and others – to emerge....
Romanoff made his admission largely because pressure on him to confirm or deny reports from last fall was renewed after the White House was forced last Friday to detail what they offered to Rep. Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania Democrat, to get him out of his Senate primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter.
Labels:
Andrew Romanoff,
Blagojevich,
Rahm Emanuel,
Sestak,
Valerie Jarrett
"What does it cost to get an unqualified student into the University of Illinois law school? "
"Five jobs for graduating law students, suggest internal e-mails released Thursday.... When Law School Dean Heidi Hurd balked on accepting the applicant in April 2006, [University of Illinois Chancellor Richard] Herman replied that the request came "Straight from the G. My apologies. Larry has promised to work on jobs (5). What counts?" Hurd replied: 'Only very high-paying jobs in law firms that are absolutely indifferent to whether the five have passed their law school classes or the Bar.' Hurd's e-mail suggests that students getting the jobs are to be those in the 'bottom of the class.' Law school rankings depend in part on the job placement rate of graduates."
The G = (apparently) Blagojevich.
Devastating.
(Via TaxProf.)
The G = (apparently) Blagojevich.
Devastating.
(Via TaxProf.)
"Black care never catches a rider whose pace is fast enough. You got that?"
Said wacky old Rod Blagojevich, who pleaded not guilty today.
Can someone tell me how they got that photograph at the link to look so surreal?
***
Can someone tell me how they got that photograph at the link to look so surreal?
Labels:
Blagojevich,
law,
photography,
psychology
Can we say Roland Burris lied to get to his Senate seat?
Here's what we know so far. I see no reason to be delicate about it. I have defended Burris — click the tag to see — and I say that if he was not forthcoming about how he got the seat Blagojevich handed him, he does not deserve to keep it. Expel him, Senate!
Labels:
Blagojevich,
lying,
Roland Burris,
Senate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)