As count I statement 3 (pages 63 & 64) do not contain quotes, are we supposed to evaluate the entire Libby transcripts (testimony) or would the court direct us to specific pages/lines.and:
We would like clarification of the term "reasonable doubt." Specifically, is it necessary for the Government to present evidence that it is not humanly possible for someone not to recall an event in order to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.Christy Hardin Smith of Firedoglake, who has been covering the Plamegate embranglement from beginning to end thinks these notes represent the ending of deliberations where it hits the jury that they're about to drop the hammer on someone .... guilt pangs ... and that this is typical during a trial.
Of course, this is reading tea leaves, but it sounds to me like one person (at least one, but in the minority) is taking the position that there is reasonable doubt because Fitz didn't prove that it was impossible for Libby not to have remembered an event.Both are criminal attorney's, Hardin a former prosecutor.
Why in the minority? Because the answer is obvious and should be to them. It sounds like the majority have tried explaining this point over and over to one or a few people and they keep not getting it.
I'm a very lucky person with every allergy known to man but still happy to be enjoying a wonderful life living in the best place in the world!