Judge narrows potential jurors in Stevens’s trial

The jury pool in Ted Stevens’s criminal trial has been narrowed to a diverse set of candidates who could determine the fate of the senator’s political career.

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and attorneys for the Alaska Republican and the Justice Department spent the day grilling 45 people, asking them about members of Congress, potential testimony from senators who may appear on Stevens’s behalf and whether they could serve as independent and open-minded jurors.

{mosads}Most of the potential jurors are black men and women, with about nine white men and women, one Asian woman and one Hispanic man.

The pool included lawyers, federal employees, contractors, security guards, an employee at the Newseum in Washington, a former Hill staffer, lobbyists and one retired woman whose son is Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) scheduler.

Twenty-nine potential jurors have been deemed qualified by the parties in the case. Under jury-selection rules, the judge and attorneys need to consider 36 people as qualified before they can pare down to 12 potential jurors and four alternates. Jury selection is expected to conclude Wednesday morning, and opening arguments will occur Thursday morning, pushing back the schedule by a day.

Sullivan said the timing of the trial has not been thrown off significantly, but added that he doesn’t have a “crystal ball” to determine when the case will end.

The timing is critical for Stevens’s political career. He is trying to be exonerated of all seven charges of concealing gifts in time to win reelection.

The government is expected to spend about three weeks with hundreds of exhibits and dozens of witnesses. Witnesses who may testify on Stevens’s behalf include former Secretary of State Colin Powell and Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). On Tuesday, Stevens’s defense team said former World Bank President James Wolfensohn may also testify to vouch for Stevens’s character.

Stevens might not take the stand. During questioning of potential jurors Tuesday, Stevens’s attorney Brendan Sullivan repeatedly pressed jurors as to whether they would judge him if he invoked his Fifth Amendment right and opted not to testify.

When one potential juror, a black woman in her 20s, said it would be “unfair” if Stevens decided not to testify and that “everyone should give their version,” she was removed from the list.

Stevens, wearing a navy blazer, a flag pin on his lapel and a yellow tie and matching pocket square, stayed through Tuesday’s hearings, appearing stoic as potential jurors were being interviewed.

At the outset of Wednesday’s proceedings, Stevens was granted a request to skip his court appearances to attend to his legislative business on Capitol Hill. But that strategy could give jurors the wrong impression that the Alaska Republican is not concerned about his corruption trial, Sullivan warned.

“We don’t want to have any negative impressions going on,” the judge told Stevens. “People reach the wrong impressions for the wrong reasons.”

“This is a problem that may exist only for this week,” said Brendan Sullivan, the lead defense attorney, referring to the Senate’s scheduled adjournment date of Sept. 26. But it’s increasingly likely that the Senate will stay into October to handle the fallout of the financial crisis.

If Stevens skips his work on Capitol Hill, his political opponents could point out that his criminal trial is preventing him from legislating during the biggest financial crisis in decades. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee announced Tuesday that it would begin airing television ads highlighting the rarity of his criminal indictment.

There are several potential jurors who could be controversial when proceedings continue Wednesday. One woman said she would be fair and keep an open mind. But she criticized politicians, saying her “true feelings about elected officials is that they are supposed to represent the people that they serve … and that they are not above the law.”

Another of Stevens’s attorneys, Robert Cary, requested that the woman be excused from the list of witnesses, but Brenda Morris of the Justice Department pointed out that the woman would keep an open mind.

The judge sided with the government. Judge Sullivan also took the government’s side when a man, who lobbies on behalf of the Direct Selling Association, said he “may have a bias in favor of the defendant” because of his political leanings. The man was excused from the jury pool.