Who Actually Convicted "Scooter"?

Well, the word by some on both the radio and TV today is how "Scooter" is taking a fall for others higher up the food chain. He was found guilty of 4 felonies and could spend up to 20 years in prison. There are those that say, "no big deal", he'll join a TV show as a commentator, and make millions after he does his time. Many seem to feel he'll get a reduced sentence, and no where near the maximum.

That's really easy for those to say who are on the outside. I for one would not want to spend any time in jail, let alone prison. Does anyone think Martha Stewart is a better person for the time she spent in prison? Would any of you want to spend a day in jail, a week, month, or a year? Think what could happen to you, if you survived. Yes, people die in prison, and not all by natural causes. Libby would likely be a target, and have to be protected from the general population.

They are saying that they are going to appeal the decision. A quote from the times and his lawyer, Theo Wells.... "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."

What convicted Libby? The Vice President's chief of staff was a man who worked long hours and had a notoriously bad memory, but not bad enough to explain away lying to the grand jury about how he heard about the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame. Did the news media have any influence on the jury? Were they sequestered? Did any of them hear anything about what was being said on TV or in the papers while they were deliberating?

My guess is yes, at least one or more of the juror's heard or saw something. That, more than likely, had significant influence on the outcome. A juror is asked under oath to follow the letter of the law, not whether they believe it is right or wrong. I've been on several juries over my adult life. On more than one occasion, a member of the jury chose to put in their own interpretation of "justice".

I recall one time when a person was being charged with reckless driving (We didn't know it at the time, but this was a 3rd retrial, with the charge being reduced to this. Originally, the charge was driving under the influence.) After the closing arguments, we went into deliberation in the jury room. After all was discussed, we voted, not unanimous, so we tried again. We got to where the majority felt he was guilty. In further discussions, one juror said he felt it was okay to drink and drive. He drove better after a drink or two to relax him. That the person being tried was small business man, a welder....the government was always picking on the "little guy", so under no condition was he going to find the guy guilty.

We ended up with a hung jury, 11 to 1. The one hold out was the guy who drank to relax. He did not follow the judges instructions. He shouldn't have made it into the jury pool, let alone be a juror, yet he was, and his decision let this person go free on all charges. I'd bet news was leaked to the jury, and that at least one had something to say about what was heard. The news media helped convict Libby.

Will Bush pardon Libby? I don't think so. There's a year and a half left in his Presidency, way too long for him to jump in and do anything now. Remember the two border patrol agents who look like they were framed? They're still in prison. With all the crap flying, the President doesn't need to walk right into it!