No Libby verdict after 3 days of deliberations

Historians have reviewed multiple sets of notes from the same Middle Ages sermon and found that different people created different written records, said Harvard historian Ann Blair. Notes on early inquisitions similarly appear to be skewed by the inquisitor's impressions, she said.

Libby notes
In Libby's case, FBI agent Deborah Bond wrote a report saying Libby "adamantly denied" discussing CIA operative Valerie Plame. The original FBI notes, however, contain no record of that denial. Rather, they say he may have discussed Plame but couldn't recall.

"Adamantly might not be the perfect word," Bond acknowledged at trial.

Prosecutors say Libby told New York Times reporter Judith Miller that Plame, the wife of prominent war critic Joseph Wilson, worked for the CIA. As evidence, they point to Miller's note, set off by parentheses, that said, "Wife works for bureau?"

Miller testified that she believed Libby told her Plame worked for a bureau of the CIA. But she said she sometimes sets things off in parentheses when she already knows information and wants to ask about it. That's how Libby's attorneys want jurors to read those notes.

That's also how Libby handled his own notes as he scrambled from one high-level White House meeting to the next. Sometimes he made to-do lists. Other times his lists were things he'd just learned. And when he crossed things off, sometimes it meant he'd discussed them with the vice president. Other times it meant he decided not to. Only Libby knew for sure.

"Your notes are not X-rays. Your notes are a guide for you," said Roger W. Shuy, a Georgetown University linguistics expert who reviews documents and notes for court cases. "Notes are inherently not complete."

Former Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper testified that Libby confirmed for him that Plame worked at the CIA. That confirmation did not appear in Cooper's notes. Libby says he told Cooper only that he'd heard something like that but didn't know for sure.

Cooper could not explain a line in his typewritten notes that read: "had somethine about the wilson thing and not sure if it's ever."

Libby's lawyers believe that was supposed to read: "Heard something about the Wilson thing, but not sure if it's even true."

When it comes to the credibility of notes, however, Libby's attorneys sought to have it both ways. They told jurors that another FBI agent's notes, which seemed to contradict NBC reporter and government witness Tim Russert, should be believed. And attorneys made it a point to tell jurors that Libby had only one note mentioning Plame.

(MSNBC.com is a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC Universal.)

Ronald P. Fisher, a memory expert at Florida International University, said FBI agents and reporters have similar problems: Journalism schools and criminal justice classes focus heavily on interview techniques and investigative tactics but offer little in the way of actual note-taking instruction.

"I have a feeling people believe they take better notes than they do," Fisher said.

One of the few reporters whose notes were not dissected in the Libby trial was Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward. He spoke confidently about what he learned about Plame and when he learned it.

He had taped his interview.

NBC's Joel Seidman contributed to this report.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

U.S. pledges emission cuts ahead of summit   Obama to speak Tuesday on Afghanistan policy Stars are out at White House state dinner Analysis: Obama not a ‘gut player’ on war   Is Obama's star dimming as U.S. stock drops? NYT: Medical debt spurs more bankruptcies Newsweek: Deconstructing Arkansas and Blanche Lincoln NYT: Health bill revives abortion groups Obama vows to ‘finish the job’ in Afghanistan Ill. Democrats: Keeping Obama Senate seat not easy Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: