U.S. Assistant Attorney Eric S. O’Malley stated in his motion that contrary to the claim of the defendants that the federal government engaged in an organized and intentional effort to seed the jury with relatives of witnesses, there was no such effort.
The notebook is a compilation of the information received by the federal government’s jury consultants. O’Malley said it has not been changed or altered since it was used at trial.
O’Malley said the notebook would be submitted in response to arguments and allegations against the government.
He said the federal government does not waive its privilege to this work product, but wishes to submit the notebook for the court’s review in chambers with the aim of putting to rest a line of argument that might otherwise waste the time and resources of both the court and the defendants.
The defendants earlier claimed that the selection of jury was “rigged” because some of the government witnesses were relatives of some of the jurors.
In a separate motion, the federal government has amended its motion asking the federal court to compel disclosure and request for court to call the witness who spilled the relationships of some witnesses to some jurors.
In their original motion last week, O’Malley said the federal government erroneously requested June 22, 2009 as the date of hearing when in fact, the information sought is needed as soon as possible.
In order to prepare for the underlying hearings set for June 22, 2009 on the defendants’ motions for acquittal or new trial, the federal government requests that the hearing be set on or before June 4.
A federal jury found the defendants guilty of corruption charges.
