I don't blog about the Libby trial, but...

This is just too good to pass up.

Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby is fighting to keep his grand jury testimony about the leak of a CIA operative's name from being released and broadcast in the media.

Libby's grand jury testimony _ the sworn statements he gave to investigators about his conversations with Vice President Dick Cheney and journalists _ is at the heart of his perjury trial. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald plans to play hours of recordings of that testimony in court next week to bolster his case that Libby lied and obstructed the investigation.

Trial evidence is normally public and all exhibits in Libby's case have been made public so far. Even though Fitzgerald successfully fought to get Libby's full grand jury testimony admitted into evidence, Libby's attorneys say the audiotapes should not be released outside the courtroom.

Libby defense attorney William Jeffress, who successfully argued a Supreme Court case that kept the Watergate tapes from being released, said in court Thursday that grand jury tapes are never meant to be made public.

He said he knew of no case when such recordings have been released. [emphasis mine]

A couple thoughts. The judge would probably not be willing to release the recordings had not the jury been impaneled already. The recordings could influence or prejudice them. But that isn't a problem since the jury has been chosen.

But what could prevent the judge from releasing the recordings is the highlighted sentence. Some judges are averse to setting legal precedent. I have no idea if this judge is one of them.

(read more)