Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Trial Sought for Lawyer in Terror Case ('Rat juror's attempt to rescue Lynne Stewart)
The New York Times ^ | 13 August 2005 | Julia Preston

Posted on 08/13/2005 1:53:01 PM PDT by Stultis

Lawyers for Lynne F. Stewart, the New York lawyer who was convicted in February of aiding terrorism, have asked the judge to declare a mistrial because one juror failed to disclose during pretrial jury selection that he was biased against criminal defendants, according to federal court documents unsealed yesterday.

The documents also show that a different juror approached Ms. Stewart's lawyers after the verdict to say she had been intimidated by other jurors during their deliberations and was not clear-headed when she voted to convict Ms. Stewart and two co-defendants.

Ms. Stewart's [Joshua L. Dratel and Jill R. Shellow-Lavine] lawyers have asked the judge, John G. Koeltl, to conduct an inquiry about that juror's misgivings.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: lynnestewart; terrortrials; traitors; treason
Precises...

First juror (#82) on bias, failure to disclose:

Stewart's lawyers were contacted after the verdict by a prospective juror who had been eliminated. Stewart's lawyers claim that this prospective juror recounted a May 20, 2004 "chatt" with juror 82 (who sat in the 12th seat in court).

Juror 82 "told us he had been in jail for a couple of nights when he was in the military and that he did not want to go back there," the prospective juror reported. "He then said, in substance, that if someone is in front of a judge on charges, it is because they had done something wrong."

Juror 82 did reveal his military service during pretrial questioning and averred that nothing therein would affect his ability to render an impartial verdict.

Don't worry, unless there's something wrong with the judge, this one should be laughed out of court.

Second "intimidated" juror (#39).

Wrote a March 25 letter to the judge, and "expanded" on her complaint in an April 26th with her lawyer, Steven Masef, and Stewart's lawyers. (AN ILLEGAL MEETING!)

Claimed that she was one of two holdouts for aquittal. During deliberations another juror said if she voted to aquit "it would be her fault if anyone died in a terrorist attack." Also claimed on the last day of deliberations that someone not directly involved in the trial pointed her out as "the holdout" as she was leaving the van that carried jurors to court. Claimed to be frightened, intimated by and bitter about her treatment by other jurors and "maybe she wasn't thinking clearly" when voting to convict.

During pretrial she testified that she was "active in New York Democratic clubs".

Prosecuters said that juror 39's statements should be disqualified because it was illegal for Stewart's lawyers to interview her. Stewart's lawyers claim this was a "regrettable error."

1 posted on 08/13/2005 1:53:03 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stultis
Why is my BS meter pinging on this...


2 posted on 08/13/2005 1:55:30 PM PDT by darkwing104 (Let's get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104
C'mon, darkwing. THEY QUESTIONED HER PATRIOTISM! You know that no 'Rat can be expected to retain their rationality (what they have of it) under such circumstances!

Regretably I conclude there is only one solution that is completely fair and will protect Democrats from such hororrs: Remove them from the jury pools. (Most easily done of course by removing them from the voter rolls!)

3 posted on 08/13/2005 2:02:19 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stultis

Can't we just have her executed as a traitor and be done with this miserable disgusting woman?


4 posted on 08/13/2005 2:15:17 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
MIDI - HOTEL CALIFORNIA

She would proudly help clients who were lower than scum
She thought she was so brilliant...prosecutors so dumb
It caught up with her finally...and she got her just desserts
And we can tell as we all watch her cry...that this loss really does hurt

She had helped Omar Rahman...the man she chose to defend
But little did we then realize she was becoming the evil sheik's friend
She denied in the courtroom but the tale was true
They would use this useful idiot...for killing me and you

Welcome, Lynne, to the hotel with the gray bars
It's no friendly place...traitor, in your face
Welcome, Lynne, to the hotel with the gray bars
You must do your time if you do the crime

She'd pass on Omar's message to his terrorist pals
They had so loved Lynne Stewart...yes, she's their gal
Violence she thought was needed...she thought it's all right
And she didn't see a thing that's wrong with the way that they fight

When it went to the jury, it took 13 days
The prosecutors smiled at her because they finally had put her away
She could get 20 years in the slammer and there she will die
She is nothing but a POS...let's all wave bye bye

Welcome, Lynne, to the hotel with the gray bars
It's no friendly place...traitor, in your face
Welcome, Lynne, to the hotel with the gray bars
You must do your time if you do the crime

What is wrong with leftists...who hate our country so
If they do not like it here, well then, maybe they should just go
Let's start a fund for their airfare...and then escort them away
Perhaps they'd like Rwanda better...it's a place that they would love to stay

But, Lynne, you can't join them...'cause you're occupied
A great big dyke whose name is Rock...has been watching with her loving eye
She is always friendly...you're gonna find out
No attorney will come to your aid...when you try to shout

5 posted on 08/13/2005 2:16:40 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
"He then said, in substance, that if someone is in front of a judge on charges, it is because they had done something wrong."

Its a common misconception that the constitution requires the total believe in the innocence of defendants.

The idea that totally random people are selected and charged with crimes is the logical conclusion of this misconception. But of course defense lawyers are careful to never state it quite this clearly.

True Story:
I was called to jury duty once, and when the Defense attorney asked me if I believed in the innocence of the accused until proven, I answered that I was willing to work under that assumption, but I did not believe in "Phone Book Prosecutions". He asked what Phone book prosecutions were, and I said that is where the state throws a dart at a phone book and prosecutes the person who's name it hits, but rather, the fact his client had been indited was an indication that a lot of convincing evidence to his guilt existed. Oddly enough, the defense lawyer did not challenge me off the jury.

6 posted on 08/13/2005 2:18:31 PM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I still do not understand why she is free? Is there anyone who can explain this? These left wing whacko POS like Stewart, Ron Kuby and Ramsey Clarke make their livings in this country by basically selling out America. Kuby said her prosecution was unprecedented. Since when was aiding terrorists not subject to prosecution? When did we allow terrorism conpsirators to walk free? Because they are laywers??? Give me a break!!!!!!!
7 posted on 08/13/2005 6:29:38 PM PDT by Cougar66 (The only liberal movement is what's in their diapers. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Doug....Lynn Stewart is so physically repulsive, horribly obese, FUGLY, etc., won't she be unworthy of Rock's interests?

Or is she just what Rock wants the most? 8-D


8 posted on 08/14/2005 2:17:56 AM PDT by Randy Papadoo ( "The left just doesn't know how to say "Yes"!"......Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Randi Papadoo

I write the songs, you decide. :)


9 posted on 08/14/2005 8:34:11 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson