Betsy Devine: Funny ha-ha and/or funny peculiar

So mad I could spit. The total national coverage of the Tobin trial is a few places like Wired picking up the pitiful summary AP story. Let me tell you the genesis of that story.

After the trial, after the waiting for the verdict, after the arrival of the verdict, the lawyer interviews, the attempted lawyer interviews, Real Reporters (RR) and I gathered near the courthouse door, hoping that some passing juror would give us some quotes. (They didn’t, but several RR later phoned them and got some more background. RR had provided themselves with the names of the jurors for this very reason.)

All of a sudden, a woman none of us had ever seen before rushed in through the revolving door. “What happened? What happened?” she cried. This was the AP reporter, the brand-new AP reporter, “assigned” to this story 20 minutes before she arrived.

Because the RR were working, I pulled out my notebook to help her. “Not guilty on the first count,” I said. “Guilty on each of the other two.”

“First count?” she said. “Do you happen to know what the different counts were?” I’m not putting the reporter’s name here–it wasn’t her fault that she had been thrown into a new case without any background. The AP reporter who covered the actual trial had been re-assigned pre-jury to write up human interest about Christmas bird counts.

The AP story about the verdict should have been the best, the most comprehensive story of all. Isn’t it real news that Bush’s top guy in New England was guilty of two felonies arising from an innovative technological effort to cheat NH voters out of an honest election? Instead, AP gave us a bland and bloodless mini-summary cobbled together at record speed–the entire story in its final form was on the wires by 6:15 p.m.that day–just one hour(!) after the reporter first tumbled into the courthouse waving her notebook.

And that’s now the end of the story, as national news.

Ladies and gentlemen, readers of national news, you have been robbed.

James Tobin reacted to the first guilty verdict by shaking his head?
I missed that completely, but Kevin Wack did not.

Tobin left the courthouse with his arm around his wife? I raced home to Cambridge, but Judy Harrison hung out in the cold and came back with more of the story.

Real reporters provide more than just colorful detail. They turned each story into a standalone piece that included full background on NH phonejamming. They interviewed jurors, lawyers, political gurus. I was especially touched by the insight
Eric Moskowitz (Concord Monitor) gathered from one phone interview:

Afterward, foreman Laura Clement said the jury spent considerable time studying the language of the counts and weighing the evidence.

“It really came down to: Did the evidence support the facts, and could we agree that the government proved their case on each one of the counts?” she said, adding that the jury relied heavily on the instructions from Judge Steven McAuliffe.

Although there were differences at first, all the jurors emerged satisfied, Clement said. “If you get 12 people in a room, you get 12 people who all interpret something a little different,” she said, declining to discuss specifics about how they reached the verdict. “So the decisions didn’t come easy. But it was made, and we feel good about it, and that’s it.”

At least in NH, millions of dollars in fees to fancy lawyers won’t buy a free pass if you tamper with US democracy. Even more good news–political experts say this verdict will put a damper on dirty tricks in future elections.

And that’s good news for honest people of either party.

During the 2002 campaign, I got a Democratic mailing at home. Even though my wife and I are both registered Republicans, the Democrats sent us a brochure at our home. This brochure had phone numbers for rides to the polls. I thought I might disrupt their Get-Out-The-Vote effort. This idea coalesced into disrupt their phone effort.”

I’m quoting my own notes of Chuck McGee’s December 6 testimony. His idea of disrupting Democrats’ phones was based 100% on having just read about phones that were used to help people get rides to the polls.

I’m still shaking my head that the Tobin defense team was able to convince this jury that when Chuck McGee told James Tobin about his phone-jamming plan, Tobin heard only about some kind of vague harassment of Democrats, with no mention of disrupting rides to the polls.

You’ll be hearing more about this in the weeks to come:

James Tobin’s defense team worked hard to convince jurors that Tobin knew nothing about Chuck McGee’s phone-jamming plans except for the very vague first impression that led him to help McGee contact Allen Raymond.

Tobin’s isolation from the ongoing plot seems very strange in the light of McGee’s December 7 testimony that on election day, visiting lobbyist Daryl Henry knew all about the phone-jamming. McGee was surprised at how much Daryl Henry knew, and wondered who could have told him.

Just how widespread was knowledge of the phone-jamming at GOP headquarters, if even a visitor knew so much about it? And, if knowledge was widespread, did it extend up to Tobin? Or, since both Tobin and Henry worked on VIP campaign visits, maybe Henry heard about the phone-jamming from Tobin himself?

Bong! The bell finally summoned us at almost 5 p.m., after a second long day of waiting for the Tobin jury to reach a consensus. “Please go to Courtroom 5 for the jury verdict.” Gratefully, we (five real reporters plus Betsy) hustled into the courtroom and opened up notebooks.

“Please rise for the jury.” Would their faces give anything away as they filed in? Nope–all of the twelve looked serious and all looked tired. Their deliberation had lasted almost as long as the testimony itself.

The foreperson handed the verdict to the court clerk, who read it out loud:

With respect to the first count*: Not guilty.
With respect to the second count: Guilty.
With respect to the third count: Guilty.

Defense attorney Dane Butswinkas was out of his seat almost before the clerk had finished reading. He demanded to have the jury polled, one by one, to see if the verdict was truly unanimous.

The court clerk accordingly polled the jurors, one by one. “Juror Number One, is this your verdict?” “Yes,” each juror replied.

After thanking the jurors for their service, Judge McAuliffe said that sentencing would occur on March 21, 2006. Outside in the corridor, reporters gathered around US Attorney Levchuk, who said he was pleased with the verdict and planned to use it in pressing his investigation further. Questions to Butswinkas were met with a crisp “No comment.” ABC news already has the (short) AP story plus a photo of Tobin leaving the courthouse.

* First count: Conspiracy Against Rights; 18 U.S.C. 241 (depriving citizens of their right to vote)
Second count: Conspiracy to commit telephone harassment in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and 47 U.S.C. § 223 (a)(1)(D),.
Third count: Aiding and abetting telephone harassment in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 223 (a)(1)(D) and 18 U.S.C. § 2
One count of the earlier Tobin indictment was dropped. Here’s the official US DOJ press release.

One phone-jamming juror was rushed to the hospital suffering chest pains, after spending Tuesday (December 13) trying to reach a verdict on James Tobin.

Spending that whole day in the same courthouse’s corridors, I’d been surprised by the cheerful calm of Tobin’s attorneys and friends.

Thinking it over, I shouldn’t have been surprised. So what if this jury finds Tobin guilty? His defense (fully financed by the very deep pockets of the Republican National Committee) is primed to set off on appeal after appeal. Eventually, some diehard Republican judge will grab the chance to set Mr. Tobin free.

My guess–and it’s purely a guess–is that things are much tenser inside the jury room, as 12 NH jurors and 2 alternates try to live up to the responsibility on them. Surely the defense was successful in profiling* at least one juror who could be won over into a sympathy vote for Tobin and his young family. Surely at least one juror has been won over by the defense attempt to frame this case as “Don’t let mean Allen Raymond hurt nice Jim
Tobin.” And my guess is that at least one juror is holding fast to the evidence showing that Tobin, in fact, promoted McGee’s illegal scheme to disrupt an election.

The jury recessed all day today (Wednesday), but will resume tomorrow…

* I asked one of the energetic young DC lawyers (EYDCL) watching the first day (“I represent one of the defendants in the civil suit”) if the defense had some ideal juror profile guiding its peremptory challenges. The EYDCL said in pitying tones, “Well, of course. They have a jury consultant.”

It’s a routine expense for big lawfirms to “profile” the kind of jury members they want. Even a full mock trial rehearsal with 60 “jurors” would cost less than $6,000 –less than one day’s worth of Tobin’s litigation team.

Chuck McGee and Allen Raymond gave very different testimony in the NH phone-jamming trial of James Tobin.

The defense claimed that Raymond’s testimony was suspect because he was hoping for federal clemency if he could incriminate Tobin.

Chuck McGee, who had already spent 7 months in prison, had nothing to hope for from the prosecutor. He did have something to hope for from the NH Republican Party, if his testimony saved Jim Tobin’s hide. The NH Republican Party is a big client of Chuck McGee’s new post-prison employer, a “national, full-service, GOP direct mail firm.” And check out the rest of his new firm’s list of clients:

Governor Craig Benson

Republican former governor of NH, elected in 2002, defeated in 2004 in a campaign that focused on Benson’s ethics.

Governor James Douglas, Lt. Governor Brian Dubie

Republican governor and lieutenant governor of Vermont

Vermont Republican Party and New Hampshire Republican Party

Republican, obviously. Chuck McGee was Executive Director of the NH Republican Party when he ran the phone-jamming in 2002.

Americans for Job Security

Conservative “issue advocates” under investigation for using their tax-exempt millions of corporate money to influence elections.

US Senators Judd Gregg & John Sununu, US Congressmen Charlie Bass & Jeb Bradley

Republicans all, NH’s 4 representatives in DC

National Right to Work Committee

Conservative “issue advocates” who spent $1M in 2000 elections attacking Democrats.

Scott Paterno for Congress

Republican candidate, 2004, endorsed by George Bush, defeated by Democratic opponent.

NH Senate President Tom Eaton

Republican recently ousted from this job.

Elevare Communications

Republican NH State Senators Bob Clegg, Carl Johnson and Chuck Morse are promoted by this NH political PR firm.

The Dennehy Group

Former Republican National Committeeman Michael Dennehy runs this “government relations firm specializing in national grassroots strategy.”

When the civil trial comes around, I hope the Democrats will do a better job than the Federal prosecutor of making it clear that McGee as well as Raymond has conflicts of interest.

United States of America v. James Tobin (Cr. No. 04-216-01-SM) — what story do these real-life numbers tell?

84

Number of pages (printout) of “Amended and supplemental proposed jury Instructions” submitted by James Tobin’s defense team

39

Number of pages (printout) of “Jury Instructions” delivered by judge

44

Number* of objections (including subheads) made by James Tobin’s defense team while the judge was delivering his 39 pages of jury instructions

61

Number of exhibits offered by the government as evidence against James Tobin

52

Number of those 61 exhibits against which James Tobin’s defense team offered one or more objections

886,632

Number of dollars paid to James Tobin’s defense team by the Republican National Committee before August 15, 2005

While waiting for Tobin’s jury to bring in a verdict ( they didn’t yet), I discovered (thanks to real reporter Judy L. Harrison) that I could view or print official case documents from computers downstairs in the Court Clerk’s Office.

This inspired me to pass on to you certain numbers–information that’s too “slanted” for a real news story, but too technical to fit into an editorial. So, maybe the kind of thing a blogger can tell you about–even one who’s still shivering, thinking about “sidewalk interviews.”

* Hearsay in the hallway, but the same number heard from several say-ers.

Brrrrr. We step out of the Warren Rudman Courthouse onto the ice-speckled sidewalk of Pleasant Street. A subzero breeze nearly pushes me off my feet.

“I’m not looking forward to trying to interview jurors outside the courthouse,” says one of the real reporters I’m headed to lunch with. “Yeah, sidewalk interviews,” agrees another. This mostly desk-bound blogger is very impressed!

I spent December 13 once again in Concord, NH, waiting for the verdict in James Tobin’s phone-jamming trial. (More about what happened there in my next post.)

My disappointment with celebrity journalists has received the strong antidote of meeting a bunch of real working journalists, whose curiosity, fair-mindedness, work ethic, and willingness to brave icy sidwalks in search of a story truly impressed me:

• John P. Gregg (Valley News)
• Judy L Harrison (Bangor Daily News)
• Eric Moskowitz* (Concord Monitor)
• Josh Roger (NHPR)
• Kevin Wack* * (Portland Press Herald)

* Check out Eric’s December 13 story, “Last pitches in phone-jamming case.”

* * Thought-provoking quote from Kevin Wack over lunch: “It’s hard to get outside the little demographic bubble you live in.”

Josh Marshall’s TPMCafe hosts your updates and comments on the Concord, NH trial of James Tobin in the NH phone-jamming case from 2002.

I am racing out the door to NYC this morning, but here’s what the world reported on the damning testimony of Tobin’s former colleagues (Charles “Chuck” McGee and Allen Raymond) yesterday, December 7:

• Beverley’s Wang’s AP story
• Concord Monitor
• Bangor News (Tobin’s hometown paper)
• Maine Press Herald (Good piece by Kevin Wack; start here if you’re new to the story)