22 page doc filed on 09/07/06 for the Libby Case

[stop the bleeding]

here is the link to the 22 pager

09/07/2006 GOVERNMENT’S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO ADMIT EXPERT TESTIMONY - 22 pages


there were a number of other filings that were listed but most of them seemed minor and only had a couple of pages listed for each one - So I only pulled the one listed above/ in bold face below - let me know if one of the ones listed below may need to be included for researching.

Doc.
No. Dates Description
140 Filed & Entered: 09/08/2006
Order on Motion to Continue

138 Filed & Entered: 09/07/2006
Notice (Other)

139 Filed & Entered: 09/07/2006
Memorandum in Opposition

136 Filed & Entered: 09/06/2006
Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

137 Filed & Entered: 09/06/2006
Order on Motion for Hearing

133 Filed & Entered: 09/05/2006
Terminated: 09/06/2006

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief
134 Filed & Entered: 09/05/2006
Terminated: 09/06/2006
Motion for Hearing

135 Filed & Entered: 09/05/2006
Motion for Hearing


as always the rest are here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x3589

[Scout1071]

1. Can you translate? nt

[stop the bleeding]

2. hang tight there will be other posters with more know how

in regards to this filing and this subject/case in general.

I post them(the filings) and then read the responses later to see what comes up.

[H2O Man]

4. Here goes:

this is Mr. Fitzgerald's response to Team Libby's attempt to bring a "memory expert" into the trial. What is at issue is not if Dr. Bjork is an "expert" in his field, or if he is a good and decent man. Mr. Fitzgerald is more than happy to note the good doctor has made interesting and important studies of the complex nature of human memory.

What is at issue is that Team Libby wants to introduce scvientific evidence that isn't directly related to the case. As such, its "probative value" -- meaning its potential contribution to creating a higher level of understanding on the jury's part -- is far outweighed by "the potential for confusing an (sic) misleading the jury, and unnecessarily protracting the trial." (pg 20)

Mr. Fitzgerald's stance is simple: in cases where a witness is asked to identify a person they may have seen but once, in the excitement of an accident or crime, is more prone to be the material that a memory expert would be called for. In this case, quite simply, Scooter Libby told FBI investigators, Mr. Fitzgerald, and the grand jury that Mr. Russert told him about Valerie Plame. He had originally told the FBI this, convinced it was a wonderful cover story that would never be exposed .... because reporters don't give up sources, etc. But after Russert told a very different story (their conversation was not "off the record"), Scooter was stuck -- he had to keep telling the same lie. And he did. In fact, he went into great detail about the "conversation."

Mr. Fitzgerald is saying that juries always consider things like memory -- and dishonesty -- when evaluating cases. One thing is clear: a person can be so busy they honestly forget something that happened -- but never so busy that they honestly remember something that never happened. That, in unscientific terms, is the difference between sugar and shit. And Mr. Fitzgerald is saying the jury doesn't need a memory expert to explain the difference between sugar and shit.

[Tigress DEM]

5. I think the difference between sugar and shit is about 30 years.

Love your clear and simple explanation.

All I want for Fitzmas is my country back, my coutry back, so I can wish you Merry Fitzmas!

[Scout1071]

7. Wow. You are the best.

Thanks for translating.....as always.

You are a very valued member of DU and DKos H2O Man.

[blogslut]

3. Thanks for this

I'm no expert but I'll read it when I can. My guess is the Govt said: "No, Scooter. You can't bring experts in to justify your supposed forgetfullness"

[kpete]

6. Have you been hiding under a rock?

Good to read you.

I miss the Plame threads...

FDL Had some good dialogue on this today.

http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/12/libby-trial-date-set-jan-16-begins-jury-selection/

[DemReadingDU]

8. Thank you for keeping us posted with the filings

K&R

[Me.]

9. Armitage To Be Incuded In Plame Lawsuit

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14805910/

*shadow government*

[H2O Man]

10. I think that

they have to. He needs to be deposed as soon as possible. There is more to his involvement than meets the eye.