Christie Crime Digest-Volume IV

[Laxman]

133. I Don't Know....

the jury had some interesting questions today. You never know if it was the entire jury or just one or two jurors who wanted some clarification. I gave up trying to interpret jury questions a long time ago.

Bridgegate jurors: Is conspiracy a crime if no intent of revenge?

Jurors in the Bridgegate trial in their first full day of deliberations left without reaching a verdict Tuesday, but not before sparking an emotional debate between defense attorneys and the judge in the case regarding the alleged motive behind the political scandal.

A written question passed from the jury room led to an angry exchange and a rebuke from the judge over an issue defense attorneys said could "eviscerate" their case.

At issue was whether whether Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Baroni, the two former Christie administration insiders charged with illegally shutting down toll lanes at the George Washington Bridge to cause traffic problems in Fort Lee, could be found guilty of conspiracy, if their intent had not been to punish Mayor Mark Sokolich.

U.S. District Judge Susan D. Wigenton, who is presiding over the case in federal court in Newark, said the answer was "yes."

"You can be guilty of a conspiracy without this specific purpose," Wigenton told prosecutors and defense attorneys.

But Michael Critchley, who represents Kelly, argued strongly against the judge's response. "By answering the way you are answering, you are directing a verdict of guilty," he declared, before dropping back into his chair, as if deflated. The judge immediately chastised him.

I don't think Bridget is going to get off on Count 2 or the wire fraud charge. The combination of time for some traffic problems, is it wrong that I'm smiling and can we cause some traffic problems at the rabbi's house just leaves a trail of breadcrumbs right back to her doorstep.
Read it here: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2016/11/bridgegate_jurors_ask_if_conspiracy_is_a_crime_if.html#incart_river_home_pop