Libby jury asked to explain 'reasonable doubt' question

Story Highlights

• NEW: Judge and lawyers struggle with jurors' question in the CIA leak trial
• Question might indicate jurors are having trouble with term "reasonable doubt"
• Jury is in ninth day of deliberations in I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby trial
• Vice President Dick Cheney's ex-aide accused of perjury and obstruction of justice

Adjust font size:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A judge Monday asked jurors in the I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby perjury trial to clarify a question they posed in a note to the bench as they deliberate the fate of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff.

The jury sent U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton a note Friday indicating a struggle to understand the term "reasonable doubt."

The jurors asked whether it would have to be "not humanly possible for someone not to recall an event" for them to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Libby contends he suffers from a poor memory. His attorneys tried to show his overwhelming White House workload, including urgent national security matters, could have caused discrepancies in what he told investigators.

After hearing 14 days of testimony, jurors entered their ninth day of deliberations Monday.

At a hearing Monday on the jury's question, prosecutors, Walton and defense counsel had difficulty finding common ground on how the judge should respond to the question.

"Asking them to define 'humanly possible' is going to embroil them in a question not asked in the case," said defense attorney William Jeffress.

But Walton tried to craft a question he hopes will clarify.

" 'Humanly possible' is just a nebulous term," Walton said, "and I just don't know exactly what it means. I should ask them for clarification."

The question suggests some members of the jury are looking for a complete absence of doubt, while others believe that the standard of proof expected from prosecutors falls short of that.

"It could show jurors are trying to convince others you don't need this level of evidence to find reasonable doubt," former federal prosecutor Alex Rene said.

CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, after reading the notes the jury sent to Walton, said, "There is nothing that says the government has to show that it is 'not humanly possible' for someone not to recall an event."

Another question slowing down the jury's effort to reach a verdict centered on its search for testimony to support one of the charges of false statements against Libby. Walton pointed out jurors are free to consider any portion they feel could help their assessment.

A five-count indictment against Cheney's aide alleges perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to the FBI and a grand jury investigating how Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative.

Libby is not accused of exposing Plame. He resigned in 2005 after the grand jury indicted him.

Prosecutors contend Libby disclosed Plame's covert profession to reporters as part of a plan to discredit her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador who alleged that the Bush administration twisted some intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war.

Wilson, who conducted a CIA-sponsored trip to Niger, wrote in a July 2003 New York Times editorial that he found no evidence Iraq sought to buy uranium from the African nation, as the administration claimed.

The jury is down to 11 members -- seven women and four men. A week ago, one of the jurors revealed that she had obtained outside information that prompted the judge to disqualify her.

The defense said it would accept 11 jurors to avoid having to start deliberations over with an alternate. The prosecution objected, but Walton overruled, and the panel has continued with one chair empty.

Testimony and evidence in the trial began January 23.

If convicted on all five counts, Libby, 56, could be sentenced to 30 years in prison and fined $1.25 million.

CNN's Kevin Bohn and Paul Courson contributed to this report.