The Posturing Begins

Shortly after the verdict, the Defense began posturing for the inevitable appeal (and motion for new trial) by filing a motion seeking the responses to the questionnaire distributed by the court to prospective jurors.  The questionnaire is on the DU Corporate Governance web site. 

The Defense wants to investigate whether “error may have been committed in the manner in which the expanded jury venire pool of 1,000 was winnowed down to 78 persons.”  In other words, they want to see whether the answers by those not called "demonstrate bias justifying automatic excusal. . . ” 

In its response filed on Friday, May 4, the Government declined to oppose disclosure but took the position that the Defense had no statutory right to the information, providing Judge Nottingham (who, by the way, has become chief of the Federal District of Colorado) with a basis for denying the motion.  The Government did seek limits on what was disclosed, requesting that the court 

• "(1) redact the personal identifying information that would identify either the prospective juror (such as names, signatures, and addresses) or any other individuals whom the prospective juror may have identified in the questionnaire responses, (2) number the questionnaire responses, to facilitate ease of reference if the parties later must refer to the responses in any pleadings, and (3) indicate which of the responses were among the persons selected to appear for voir dire."

The Defense motion is on the DU Corporate Governance web site.  The Government's response will be posted on Monday.