[스크랩] Why Libby`s Defense Failed(07.03.07)
I. Lewis Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was found guilty today on four counts of obstructing justice and lying to the FBI and a grand jury during an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's identity. The 11-person jury acquitted Libby on a fifth count of making a false statement to FBI agents.
Related
How Libby Came Undone
His own fascination with Talking Points and Hardball weakened the defense's argument that he had bigger things to worry about than telling lies
What Convinced the Libby Jury
One of the eleven jurors in Lewis Libby's perjury trial describes how they arrived at a guilty verdict
CNN: The CIA Leak Investigation
A look into the circumstances behind the trial and conviction of Lewis "Scooter" Libby
The offenses carry possible sentences of more than 20 years in prison, but because he is a first-time offender, Libby will probably receive substantially less under federal sentencing guidelines. His lawyer, Theodore Wells, said he would move for a new trial and, if the motion is denied, would appeal.
"We believe, as we said at the time of his indictment, that he is totally innocent and that he did not do anything wrong," Wells said shortly after the verdict. "And we intend to keep fighting to establish his innocence."
The prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, said that it was "actually sad that we had a situation that a high-level official obstructed justice and lied under oath. We wish that it had not happened, but it did. We are gratified by the jury's verdict."
One of the jurors, Denis Collins, said there was "a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury" and that it seemed as if Libby "was the fall guy" for Cheney and others in the White House. It took the jury about 10 days to reach a verdict.
The felony charges at the heart of the high-profile case were built around evidence that Libby lied when he denied leaking the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame to reporters. Plame is married to Joseph Wilson, the former ambassador who wrote an op-ed piece in 2003 debunking the WMD justifications for the Iraq war. Libby supposedly leaked Plame's name as part of a White House campaign to discredit Wilson.
Though outing a CIA agent can be illegal, no one was charged with doing that to Plame. Instead, Fitzgerald went after Libby for lying. Though seemingly a side issue, Fitzgerald told reporters it was like "throwing sand in the umpire's face," a serious transgression that stops investigators from doing their jobs. Today, Fitzgerald came back to that theme, stressing that to "have a high-level official do that under oath in a national security investigation is something that's not acceptable."
The trial opened with a bang on January 23, as Wells declared, the elegant Theodore Wells, declared that White House officials were making his client a scapegoat to protect presidential adviser Karl Rove. Washington salivated over the suggestion of a rift in the Bush Administration, but it came to naught. The defense never offered any testimony to back up the claim, and by the end of the trial, it was largely forgotten.
Instead, over the next 10 days, jurors heard the methodical drone of the prosecution's effort to portray Libby as a liar. No fewer than four officials testified that they had told Libby who Plame was, and two reporters testified that Libby later confirmed her identity in one way or another. Fitzgerald followed those witnesses with a numbing eight hours of Libby, on tape, denying or not recalling any of those conversations.
But that was all mere prelude to the case's pivotal witness, NBC's Tim Russert. Despite Libby's claim that he first learned about Valerie Plame from Russert, the host of NBC's Meet the Press told jurors that he never spoke with Libby about her. During cross-examination, Wells attacked the journalist's memory, but other than a few nicks and cuts, he was unable to inflict much damage. Collins confirmed today the importance of Russert's testimony. "The primary thing that convinced us on most of the counts was the conversation, the alleged conversation, with Russert," the juror said, explaining that Libby was told about Plame's identity "at least nine times" before he spoke with Russert.
Wells was playing catch-up by the time he opened the case for the defense, teasing the court with the possibility that Libby and even Vice President Dick Cheney would testify. Wells first trotted out six prominent reporters to say they had never discussed Plame with Libby during the summer of 2003. It was an odd start, an indirect approach, implying that if Libby hadn't talked about the CIA operative with luminaries like The Washington Post's Bob Woodward, he probably hadn't mentioned her to any reporter.
But the defense's main strategy was to show that Libby, as Cheney's chief of staff, was far too preoccupied with affairs of state, like the Iraq war and the nuclear capabilities of Iran and North Korea, to remember being told about Plame. "The wheels are falling off the Bush Administration," Wells told jurors in describing the times. "Thousands of young kids are on the ground [in Iraq]. It's a crazy period."
Libby and then Cheney were expected to testify about just how crazy things were, but without notice, Wells informed the court that they would not take the stand. Instead, he offered John Hannah, Libby's former deputy, who described how terrible his boss's memory was. Then, after only three days, the defense rested its case.
Declining to put Libby or Cheney on the stand was a controversial move — and one that the defense would pay for. Often in criminal cases, and especially in those involving perjury, jurors like to hear the defendant explain his actions personally. But Libby would no doubt have been cross-examined harshly, and Cheney might have been embarrassed to explain publicly his role in undermining Wilson's criticisms of the war.
In any event, the judge said he felt misled, at least about Libby, and he told Libby's lawyers that they were "playing games with the process." To punish them, he ruled that they could not say in closing arguments that the pressure of national security issues prevented Libby from remembering any conversations about Plame. All the lawyers could say was that Libby "had a lot on his plate."
Although the criminal trial has ended, the legal wrangling is far from over. In a lawsuit filed July 13, Plame and Wilson accused Libby, Cheney and presidential adviser Karl Rove of violating their rights to free speech, privacy and equal protection by conspiring to reveal Plame's identity. The suit has essentially been on hold while the criminal trial played out, and it may go away if the three defendants win their argument that, as government officials, they are immune from getting sued. Cheney, as a sitting vice president, has the best chance of getting full immunity, but the other two, as behind-the-scenes guys, may have a trickier case to make. If the lawsuit goes forward, the process of legal discovery may allow each side to demand piles of information from the other. That prospect should keep Plame and Wilson in the public eye for quite a while longer.
번역사학원,번역자격증시험,번역학원추천,번역가,번역사,번역학원,일어번역학원,중국어번역전문학원,중국어번역사자격증,번역전문학원,번역사자격증,번역통역학원,일본어번역학원,일본어번역사,중국어번역학원,번역자격증,번역가시험,일본어번역가,일본어번역사자격증,중국어번역사,중국어번역가/번역사자격증학원/번역사자격증시험학원/일본어번역사자격증학원/일본어번역사자격증전문학원/일본어번역사자격증시험/일본어번역사자격증시험안내/중국어번역사자격증시험전문학원/중국어번역사시험학원/중국어번역사자격증시험안내/번역사자격증시험/번역사시험일정/번역사시험일정안내/번역사시험학원/번역사자격증시험/번역사시험일정/번역사시험일정안내/번역사시험학원/번역사자격증시험/번역사시험일정/번역사시험일정안내/번역사시험학원/번역사자격증시험/번역사/일본어번역사/중국어번역사/일어번역사/영어번역사/번역사학원/중어번역사/번역사자격증/번역사시험/번역사자격증학원/번역사자격증시험학원/일본어번역사자격증학원/일본어번역사자격증전문학원/일본어번역사자격증시험/일본어번역사자격증시험안내/일어번역학원,영어번역학원,영어번역가,영어번역사,영어번역전문학원,영어번역사학원,영어번역사시험,영어번역사자격증,일본어번역사학원,중국어번역학원,영어전문학원/번역사영어학원/영어번역/영어번역가시험/영어번역가자격증/영어번역가전문학원/영어번역가학원/영어번역사시험/영어번역사/영어번역사자격증/영어번역사자격증학원/영어번역사전문학원/영어번역학원,영어번역가,영어번역사,영어번역전문학원,영어번역사학원,영어번역사시험,영어번역사자격증,영어번역학원,영어번역가,일어번역학원,일본어번역사학원,일본어번역사자격증학원/일본어번역사자격증전문학원/일본어번역사자격증시험/일본어번역사자격증시험안내/일본어번역사자격증학원/일본어번역사자격증전문학원/일본어번역사자격증시험/일본어번역사자격증시험안내/일본어번역학원,일본어번역사,일본어번역가,일본어번역사자격증/중국어번역전문학원/중국어번역사자격증/번역전문학원/중국어번역학원/중국어번역전문학원/중국어번역사자격증/중국어번역사학원/중국어번역사자격증학원/중국어전문학원/중국어번역가자격증/중국어번역사자격증시험안내/중국어번역사/중국어번역가/중국어번역가전문학원/가이드/가이드학원/가이드전문학원/관광가이드/관광통역가이드/관광통역가이드학원/가이드자격증/가이드시험/관광가이드시험/관광가이드자격증/관광가이드학원/여행가이드/통역학원/통역시험/통역자격증/통역어학원/통역사학원/통역번역학원/영어통역/영어통역학원/영어통역사/영어통역가이드/영어통역가이드학원/영어관광가이드/영어관광가이드학원/영어관광가이드시험/영어가이드/영어관광학원/영어가이드학원/영어관광통역학원/일어가이드/일어관광가이드/일어관광통역학원/일어통역가이드/일어통역학원/일어통역가이드학원/일본어통역학원/일본어관광학원/일어관광학원/일본어통역사/일본어가이드/일본어가이드학원/일본어통역가이드/일본어관광통역가이드학원/중국어가이드/중국어가이드학원/중국어통역학원/중국어관광가이드/중국어관광통역학원/중국어통역가이드/중국어통역가이드학원/중국어관광학원/중국어통역가이드/중국어통역사/관광통역안내원/관광통역안내원시험/관광통역학원/관광통역가이드/관광통역안내사/관광통역안내사시험/관광통역안내사학원/관광통역안내원학원/관광통역자격증/관광통역안내사자격증/관광통역안내원자격증/통번역학원/통역학원추천/통역가이드/통역가이드학원/현대번역통역어학원/현대번역통역학원/현대번역통역어학원안내/현대번역통역어학원약도/현대번역통역어학원추천/현대번역통역어학원위치/번역사/번역가/번역사학원/번역사시험/번역사자격증/번역가시험/번역가학원/번역가자격증/번역자격증시험/번역자격증학원/번역학원추천/번역전문학원/번역학원/번역통역학원/번역자격증/영어번역학원/영어번역가/영어번역사/영어번역전문학원/영어번역사학원/영어번역사시험/영어번역사자격증/영어번역자격증시험/영어번역사자격증시험/영어번역사자격증학원/영어번역사학원/영어번역시험/일어번역학원/일본어번역학원/일본어번역자격증/일어번역자격증/일어번역시험/일본어번역시험/일본어번역사/일본어번역가/일어번역사/일어번역가/일본어번역사자격증/일본어번역가자격증/일본어번역자격증시험/일본어번역사자격증시험/일본어번역사자격증학원/일본어번역사학원/중국어번역사/중국어번역가/중국어번역전문학원/중국어번역/중국어번역학원/중국어번역자격증/중국어번역시험/중국어번역사자격증/중국어번역가자격증/중국어번역사자격증학원/중국어번역사자격증시험/
관광통역학원,가이드자격증,관광가이드시험,관광가이드자격증,관광가이드학원,관광통역가이드,관광통역안내사,통역학원추천,통역가이드,통역가이드학원,관광통역자격증,여행가이드,외국어학원,통역학원,통역시험,통역자격증,통역어학원,통역사학원,통역번역학원,관광통역사/관광통역사학원/통역학원/관광통역학원/통역전문학원/관광통역전문학원/영어통역학원/일어통역학원/일본어통역학원/중국어통역학원/관광통역사/관광통역사학원/통역학원/관광통역,영어가이드학원,영어통역학원,통번역학원,통역학원추천,영어통역,영어가이드,영어관광학원,영어통역가이드,영어통역가이드학원,영어관광가이드,영어관광통역학원,일본어가이드,일어가이드,일어관광가이드,일어관광통역학원,일어통역가이드,일어통역학원,일본어통역학원,일본어관광학원,여행가이드,일본어관광가이드,일본어관광통역학원,일본어가이드학원,일본어통역가이드,일본어통역가이드학원,일본어관광통역가이드학원가이드/로컬가이드/로컬가이드자격증/로컬가이드시험/일본현지가이드/일본관광가이드/가이드학원/관광가이드/일본어관광가이드학원/일본로컬가이드시험/일본로컬가이드자격증시험/일본로컬가이드/영어학원/영어전문학원/영어회화/영어회화학원/영어통역학원/영어번역학원/영어관광가이드/영어통역가이드/일본어학원/일본어전문학원/일본어회화/일본어회화학원/일본어통역학원/일본어번역학원/일본어관광가이드/일본어통역가이드,중국어가이드,중국어가이드학원,중국어통역학원,중국어관광통역학원,여행가이드,외국어학원,중국어관광학원,중국어통역가이드,중국어통역가이드학원,중국어통역사,중국어관광가이드,중국어통역가이드,중국어통역,가이드자격증,중국어통역,중국어통역학원,중국어가이드,중국어통역학원,중국어가이드학원,중국가이드,중국어통역사,통역가이드,가이드중