Subpoena {of Joseph Wilson} challenged in CIA leak case (AP/CNN)

[eppur_se_muova]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson has filed a motion to quash the witness subpoena for him issued last week in the Lewis "Scooter" Libby trial, arguing the defense has no right to call a witness whose testimony would not help it.

"Mr. Wilson is such a witness," the motion to quash said. "He personally observed none of the events that led to Mr. Libby's indictment and he has no direct personal information regarding Mr. Libby's defense, i.e., the matters Mr. Libby worked on at the White House or Mr. Libby's memory or veracity.

"Thus, Mr. Wilson's testimony would not be relevant or material to the defense and, therefore, should not be compelled."

Libby's trial on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to investigators probing the 2003 disclosure of CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity is scheduled to begin in mid-January. Libby resigned as Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff on the day he was indicted in October 2005.
***
(not much) more: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/20/libby/index.html

[Roland99]

1. Hmmm....something doesn't sit well with me re: this attempt to "quash" the subpoena.

[Peace Patriot]

2. what? n/t

[Ian David]

3. It's standard operating procedure. n/t

[Roland99]

4. Is it? Seems he'd be more than pleased to help pile crap on that criminal.

[Mist]

5. What do Libby's lawyers hope to gain by a subpoena of Wilson? Is it another

delaying tactic, or a "confuse and confabulate" move? What's the point?