« Steyn Kampf
David Ignatius is Makin’ Sense »

Feb
21

Blame it on the Wookiee




Posted at 22:55 by Sadly, No!

Theodore V. Wells Jr., Libby’s attorney, didn’t use the Chewbacca defense, but maybe that would have been a better choice:

“This is a man with a wife and two children; he is a good person,” Mr. Wells told the jury in his final words. “He’s been under my protection for the last month. I give him to you. Give him back to me.”

With that, Mr. Wells teared up, sobbed audibly and sat down.

52 Comments »

  1. norbizness said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:03

    That sounds more like the “It Puts the Lotion in the Basket” or the “Bring out the Gimp!” defense.

  2. billy pilgrim said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:05

    OK, next time I engage an attorney, I am arranging for a fee rebate if he starts crying.

  3. billy pilgrim said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:05

    Serioulsy, how f-ed up does your case have to be to reduce your defense attorney to tears?

  4. billy pilgrim said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:06

    Hey, I only charge $200 an hour to cry.

  5. a different brad said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:07

    I think it was actually a very subtle and perhaps brilliant argument.
    You see, we’re in a war here, but despite needing to sign up criminals and neo-nazis to fill out the Army, we don’t let gays fight. Scooter’s lawyer is hinting there’s a love connection here, which clearly means that instead of going to prison Scooter should be dishonorably discharged.
    Oh, wait
    it’s a civilian court?

  6. billy pilgrim said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:12

    But it could have been truly brilliant.

    From Firedoglake, it seems that Wells stayed like that, even when Fitz started going in a direction that should have prompted an objection; the younger defense attorney kind of looke dto Wells to object, but he kept his head down; eventually they asked for a conference with the judge.

    If the defense attorney was clearly unable to perform his job, it’s a pretty easy leap to ask for a mistrial, isn’t it?

  7. billy pilgrim said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:13

    It seems obvious Scooter is playing for the pardon.

  8. Jersey Citizen said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:15

    I am crying right now.

    (Phwaw! Hhhhuh!…)

    Each of you owe me $12.00.

    (snert…)

  9. Mr. Todd said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:23

    boo-fucking-hoo-hoo

  10. Zhubin said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:23

    A pardon?! Psh! President Bush only grows stronger when he sees people sobbing over the fate of their loved ones!

  11. les said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:28

    He’s under the lawyer’s protection? What, did Darth Cheney invite him on a hunting trip?

  12. a different brad said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:28

    I’d love for Bush to pardon Libby. Getting people talking about whether a pardon is appropriate will bring up obvious connections.
    For perhaps the first time ever, I hope to hear the name Nixon very frequently in the weeks and months to come.
    We gotta stop them from going into Iran. If impeachment is what it takes, that’s what it takes.

  13. fudge-ems said,

    February 21, 2007 at 23:59

    did john boenher rush in to give succor and comfort? there-there, there-there

  14. Robert M. said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:08

    Bush pardoning Libby would be the judicial equivalent of the Republicans nominating Tom Tancredo in the 2008 general election.

    Hmm… which is a more eloquent plea for sympathy: Britney Spears with her head shaved, or a highly-paid defense lawyer in a high-profile criminal trial crying in front of the jury?

  15. the_millionaire_lebowski said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:11

    If the defense attorney was clearly unable to perform his job, it’s a pretty easy leap to ask for a mistrial, isn’t it?

    Is this true? If so, reedikulus.

  16. Otto Man said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:15

    What a pansy. I’m betting Theodore V. Wells, Sr., is looking into changing his name. “I have no son!”

  17. J— said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:22

    “This is a man with a wife and two children; he is a good person,� Mr. Wells told the jury in his final words. “He’s been under my protection for the last month. I give him to you. Give him back to me.�

    With that, Mr. Wells teared up, sobbed audibly and sat down.

    Then, to the surprise of all present, he leapt from his seat and made one last desperate plea to the jury members: “I’ll give you fish. I’ll give you candy. I’ll give everything I have in my hand.“

  18. Mike Nilsen said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:43

    Don’t blame it on sunshine
    Don’t blame it on moonlight
    Don’t blame it on good times
    Blame it on the wookie
    - The Skywalker 5

  19. Worst. President. Ever. said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:46

    After he finished having his cry Mr. Wells leaped up and yelled:

    “Plus, Scooter can’t remember shit, so you must acquit!”

  20. BOSSY said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:47

    Don’t you just hate Little Memory Lapses? So pesky.

  21. Doodle Bean said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:48

    I’m confused. So Scooter is a slave? Is the jury going to put him in a cage with an aroused bear?!

  22. fardels bear said,

    February 22, 2007 at 0:57

    Whoa! Scooter has a wife and kids? How could someone with a wife and kids do anything bad? NOT GUILTY!

  23. tb said,

    February 22, 2007 at 1:16

    The Next Hurrah:

    Wells really does have a schtick, one that the journalists who have seen him before all recognize. He finishes the rational part of his case. Then he spends the last 20 minutes or so summoning rage for his client. He brings all the emotion summoned for his client to a crescendo. And then he weeps, demonstrating clearly to the jury how deeply he believes that his client has been wronged.

  24. kingubu said,

    February 22, 2007 at 1:25

    Ah, the dreaded WATB Defense.

    I suppose it was more substantial than Wells’ original idea: silently holding up a placard to the jury that reads “Cheney knows where you live” written in chicken blood.

  25. Basharov said,

    February 22, 2007 at 1:27

    If the defense attorney was clearly unable to perform his job, it’s a pretty easy leap to ask for a mistrial, isn’t it?

    Crying in front of the jury in a high profile case like this may be stupid, but it’s not grounds for a mistrial. If he took out his pecker and played with it while crying, well…

  26. Abby said,

    February 22, 2007 at 1:40

    Speaking of Chewbacca, have you heard the good news?

  27. Ugh said,

    February 22, 2007 at 1:42

    If he’ convicted, he’ll appeal, and by the time that’s finished it will be close enough to the end of Bush’s term that a pardon will do no harm to Bush (look for it in January 09).

  28. agc said,

    February 22, 2007 at 2:06

    Rather than merely crying, a competent attorney would threaten to tear the jurors’ arms out of their sockets when his client loses.

  29. TRex said,

    February 22, 2007 at 2:25

    Something about it all reminds me of the “Sexual Chocolate!” scene from “Coming to America”.

    There’s no word as to whether or not Wells dropped his microphone before he left the stage.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=ajuATv5OSHU

  30. mdhatter said,

    February 22, 2007 at 2:26

    I think the tears were so Libby could move for a mistrial due to the ‘mental incapacity’ of his counsel.

    It’d drag this thing out ’til 2008, just you watch.

  31. Woodrowfan said,

    February 22, 2007 at 3:12

    so the lawyer is a waahmbulance chaser???

  32. Kathleen said,

    February 22, 2007 at 3:16

    he just expressed himself, in his own unique way.

  33. ifthethunderdontgetya®© said,

    February 22, 2007 at 3:24

    Poor widdle scooter…it’s no fair! (lieberman whine)

  34. Spokane Moderate said,

    February 22, 2007 at 3:26

    Ladies and gentlemen, Ted Wells, in an act… of desparation.

  35. Lesley said,

    February 22, 2007 at 3:28

    I wonder what his lawyer’s going rate is per tear and sob? $600? $700? For that kind of cash, I’d strap raw onions around my neck and let her rip.

  36. Stogoe said,

    February 22, 2007 at 3:52

    Don’t there have to be grounds for appeal in trials?

  37. CaseyL said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:06

    Yes, but they’re generally procedural, not factual (i.e., no new evidence can be introduced at an appeal, though a claim that evidence was suppressed can be, and the court might then remand the case back to trial.)

    Procedural grounds do not, SFAIK, include “my attorney cried,” unless they’re going for an appeal on the grounds of incompetent defense by reason of mental disability. But with Wells’ reputation, that’s going to be a tough one. Not to mention that it would screw him over professionally for the rest of his life – I don’t think he’ll end his own career to save Scooter.

    What an embarrassing schtick.

  38. mikey said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:14

    We’re going to get a full-on guilty-on-all-counts verdict. Then we’ll learn something very important. Scooter will give up Cheney and Rove to get a suspended or seriously reduced sentence, or he will absorb the sentence knowing a pardon is coming, maybe not right away, but at least after the ‘08 election. And the groovy thing is, we’ll know right away if the fix is in. I do NOT believe this cat will give ten years of his life at this point if he had an option. There are true believers, but that’s crazy….

    mikey

  39. billy pilgrim said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:15

    I’ve been a juror- I’d like to think that the whole shtick would be transparent.

    After all, you’re supposed to decide on the basis of the evidence, not the histrionics of the counsel.

    btw, I read at FDL that the WATB Wells bills at $700 an hour. I’d guess the weeping is an extra service.

  40. billy pilgrim said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:19

    We’re going to get a full-on guilty-on-all-counts verdict. Then we’ll learn something very important. Scooter will give up Cheney and Rove to get a suspended or seriously reduced sentence, or he will absorb the sentence knowing a pardon is coming, maybe not right away, but at least after the ‘08 election. And the groovy thing is, we’ll know right away if the fix is in. I do NOT believe this cat will give ten years of his life at this point if he had an option. There are true believers, but that’s crazy….

    That’s how Fitz did the Gambinos. Flipped a couple of the lower thugs, and worked his way up.

    That’s what I’ve been holding out for, since the original GJ indictments focused on Scooter. Libby can turn on Rove and/or Cheney.

    But I dunno, Cheney would make me freak the F out. If he told me he’d EAT my children, I wouldn’t rule it out.

  41. mikey said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:28

    Dude just turned 56 in august. I submit you lose your idealogue “take one for the team” hormones in your thirties. He’s got money, a family, an AWESOME book deal. Why, he’ll be asked over and over, should he suffer when EVERY FUCKING BODY ELSE is walking out clean? He’ll roll. If he doesn’t, I think it means he’s got a GOJF Card….

    mikey

  42. mdhatter said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:29

    700 an hour will buy a lot of Visene

  43. billy pilgrim said,

    February 22, 2007 at 4:55

    Yeah, I think you’ve got the basic dynamic mikey.

    I think Bush and Cheney are evil enough that they wouldn’t particularly care if Libby went to jail for them; but they’ve gotta know that if he can count on a pardon, he might keep his trap shut.

    Makes you wonder what might happen to him after, if he did turn.

  44. Anne Laurie said,

    February 22, 2007 at 11:56

    Serioulsy, how f-ed up does your case have to be to reduce your defense attorney to tears?

    And when Scooter realizes what a fine calibre of legal work the eight million bucks he collected from his Wingnut Welfare Wurlitzer buddies has bought him… do we get to see Irving break down in tears, also?

  45. merlallen said,

    February 22, 2007 at 15:05

    If I had been in the courtroom when the wuss started crying I would have laughed so loud that a mistrial would have been declared. Do you think that was the plan?

  46. billy pilgrim said,

    February 22, 2007 at 17:02

    Apparently it is Wells’ shtick. Although in this case, he was put on the defensive by the Prosecution summation, and didn’t have the time to work up his more typical froth of outrage, which puts the weeping more in context- rage at the injustice done to “this fine man’ and weeping at the possibility that he may have to suffer for something that can’t possibly be a crime.

    But his acting was rushed and forced, so it just seemed more of a farce. He also pissed off his co-counsel by taking some time away from him.

    And then Fitz opened, mocking him by shouting “Madness! Madness! Madness!” but otherwise going into a terse, controlled rebuttal, fueled by apparent, and real, anger at the way Libby and his team has been trying to game the justice system. The appearance of this very real anger after the trumped up version Wells played would certainly be very apparent to most of the jury.

  47. BigHank53 said,

    February 22, 2007 at 18:30

    The appeals process will be dragged out over the next year and a half. Even if they can’t get a conviction overturned outright, the delays, continuations, appeals, and depositions will push things back so that Scooter doesn’t have to sit in jail for more than a couple months before his January 20th, 2009 pardon.

  48. Karl Rove II said,

    February 22, 2007 at 18:43

    I’ll cry, but only if I get to sodomize him (Libby) with a three foot strap-on.

  49. billy pilgrim said,

    February 22, 2007 at 21:12

    Karl, I thought that was a weekly occurrence when he was working.

    You’re a legend, man.

  50. Dick Cheney said,

    February 23, 2007 at 2:53

    I suppose it was more substantial than Wells’ original idea: silently holding up a placard to the jury that reads “Cheney knows where you live‚ written in chicken blood.

    Well, you’re dead wrong there mister. If the defense team had taken my advice about taking our fight to our enemies in the jury box . . . well let me just say, it would have been a hell of a lot more effective than this ‘women and children’ pabulum.

    You’re outta line!!11!.

  51. eRobin said,

    February 23, 2007 at 17:37

    There’s too much crying in public in general these days. I blame it all on retiring sports figures, who initally made it okay to blubber in a public forum that should demand stoicism. We’ve got BushCo admitting to weeping with dead soldiers’ families and his asshole father weeping in public over attacks on his idiot son. Next we’ll have a president crying over the trade gap. Bah.

  52. Kobie said,

    February 24, 2007 at 1:34

    He did it all for the wookiee.

Leave a Comment