T110209 US V Bruno (Preliminary Instructions)

1
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
2 ---------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
3
4 -versus- 09-CR-29
5 JOSEPH L. BRUNO
6 Defendant.
---------------------------------------------
7 TRANSCRIPT OF JURY TRIAL *EXCERPT held in and for
8 the United States District Court, Northern District of
9 New York, at the James T. Foley United States Courthouse,
10 445 Broadway, Albany, New York, on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2009,
11 the HON. GARY L. SHARPE, United States District Court Judge,
12 Presiding.
13 *EXCERPT - PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS
14 APPEARANCES:
15
16 FOR THE GOVERNMENT:
17 UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS OFFICE - NDNY
18 BY: ELIZABETH C. COOMBE, AUSA and
19 BY: WILLIAM C. PERICAK, AUSA
20
21 FOR THE DEFENDANT:
22 McDERMOTT, WILL LAW FIRM
23 BY: ABBE D. LOWELL, ESQ. and PAUL M. THOMPSON, ESQ.
24 DREYER, BOYAJIAN LAW FIRM
25 BY: WILLIAM J. DREYER, ESQ. and APRIL M. WILSON, ESQ.

BONNIE J. BUCKLEY, RPR, CRR
UNITED STATES COURT REPORTER - NDNY
2
1 (Court commenced at 2:15 PM.)
2 THE COURT: We've got a couple of minutes
3 before we bring the jury out. Let me remind the lawyers,
4 the associates, the support team, in general the rules of
5 good conduct for them in light of the exceptions to the cell
6 phone requirements and all of that that are in play. Cell
7 phone goes off, number one, I own it and, number two, you
8 owe the Courts a hundred bucks. So it's in your benefit to
9 shut those things off before you come in here.
10 MR. PERICAK: I gave mine to my secretary.
11 THE COURT: That's a good thing on your part.
12 These probably are not deductibles ... (off the record.)
13 THE COURT: I intend to provide preliminary
14 instructions to the jury, and I'll turn them over to the
15 parties for their opening statements.
16 MS. COOMBE: Your Honor, do you require the
17 parties to stand here for opening or can we use that podium?
18 THE COURT: I, I -- the parties can go
19 anywhere in the courtroom they like. I don't hold you to
20 seating arrangements or podiums or anything of the like.
21 Stay out of the jury box. I know you would all like to go
22 there, but stay out of the jury box. And for the defense
23 perspective, I know Bill knows this, the lines of sight in
24 here are terrible, and I recognize them. There's nothing we
25 can do about it. And, therefore, I don't hold the defense

3
UNITED STATES v BRUNO 09-CR-29
PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS
1 to where you're seated either. If you need to move over,
2 adjust so that you can see, go right ahead. That will be no
3 problem from my perspective.
4 MS. COOMBE: Would you like us to ask you
5 before we approach witnesses during examinations?
6 THE COURT: That's not necessary to the
7 extent -- not, not with me. It's not necessary.
8 MS. COOMBE: Thank you, your Honor. I have
9 one other request. Mr. Kittleson, our IT specialist, was
10 not here this morning. I wondered if I might be able to
11 introduce him to the jury, or if you would, your Honor.
12 THE COURT: You may.
13 MS. COOMBE: Thank you.
14 THE COURT: Okay.
15 (Jury present.)
16 THE COURT: You may be seated when you're
17 ready. Pardon me?
18 JUROR: Can we sit down?
19 THE COURT: Yes, you absolutely may. They're
20 all standing for your benefit. That's out of courtesy to
21 you. You come out here and have a seat. There's no magic
22 to your numbers. One is no more important than 12. One
23 through 12 are more important than 13 through the others,
24 unless you become one of the 12, which is why the alternates
25 certainly have to pay as close attention to everything that

4
1 goes on in this courtroom as anybody else.
2 Okay. I want to give you some preliminary
3 instructions. I'm not going to repeat everything that I
4 would ordinarily tell you at this point that we covered
5 during the jury selection. I may remind you of the
6 principal, but I'm not going to go into it in detail. We're
7 about to begin the trial, and so I want to give you some
8 preliminary guidance so that it will be of whatever
9 assistance it may be as you listen to the evidence.
10 I've already told you in the jury selection,
11 the Indictment is proof of nothing. You're aware of that
12 principal. I've already told you that both sides are
13 entitled to your fair consideration of the evidence, and the
14 fact that this case is brought by the United States Attorney
15 is of no moment.
16 I mentioned that there are various counts in
17 this Indictment that you will consider at the conclusion of
18 the case. It will be the Government's obligation to prove
19 Mr. Bruno guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of each element
20 of every count. So you have to separately consider each of
21 the charges.
22 I have already told you about the presumption
23 of innocence. Mr. Bruno has that protection under the
24 Constitution. It remains with him throughout this trial and
25 into your deliberations unless that presumption is removed

5
1 because based on the evidence or lack of the evidence, you
2 return a verdict of guilt because the Government has
3 satisfied its proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
4 I have explained to you preliminarily the
5 burden of proof. I read that definition to you. I'm not
6 going to repeat it. By the way, these are preliminary
7 guidelines, so I'll give you the full instructions at the
8 conclusion of the case, and that's what you'll base your
9 verdict on.
10 Let me say something about the openings and
11 the order of proof. When I have completed these opening
12 instructions, the Government will make an opening statement
13 to you. Its opening statement will outline what it expects
14 to prove so that you'll better understand the evidence as
15 it's introduced.
16 When the Government is finished, the
17 defendant, through his attorney, will have the same
18 opportunity, if he cares to. You'll recall that he's not
19 required to present any witnesses or evidence or to testify.
20 Nor is he required to give an opening statement. The
21 Constitution protects him from having to do any of these
22 things. And he may, if he elects to. But otherwise, it's
23 not required to. And you may not consider his decision in
24 any way adversely against him. Simply put, that's his right
25 to do as he pleases.
6
1 What is said in an opening statement is not
2 evidence. The evidence upon which you will base your
3 decision will come from this witness box or in the form of
4 whatever documentary evidence I elect to admit during the
5 trial.
6 After the opening statements, the Government
7 will proceed with the introduction of evidence. As I've
8 said, the defendant is not obligated to present any evidence
9 or call any witnesses. However, if he elects to do so, he
10 will do that after the Government has completed its case.
11 If he does, the government is then permitted, if it desires,
12 to offer additional evidence for the purpose of rebutting
13 the defendant's evidence. Each witness, by whomever called,
14 is first examined by the party who calls him to testify and
15 then opposing parties are permitted to cross-examine him.
16 Let me mention the role of the lawyers.
17 We operate in this country under a system
18 that's called the adversary system of justice. That means
19 we hope that the truth will emerge from the competing
20 presentation of parties who are adverse to one another. The
21 attorneys should press as hard as they can for their
22 respective positions. When they do that, they have the
23 right and the obligation to make objections to the
24 introduction of evidence they feel is improper. By the same
25 token, they may occasionally make some argument concerning

7
1 the application of some legal principal. Arguments in
2 connection with objections or legal principals are sometimes
3 made out of your presence. I try to keep that to a minimum.
4 It's inefficient. And those arguments, while they may cause
5 interruptions, as do objections, you should pay -- they're
6 not the fault of the attorneys. They're doing what they
7 should do, and you should pay that no mind. You must
8 realize, however, that statements and arguments of attorneys
9 are not evidence in the case. It is my job to resolve those
10 disputes. You must accept that my rulings have nothing to
11 do with the ultimate merits of the case. Those rulings will
12 be based solely upon my assessment of what the law requires.
13 You should not infer -- in fact, you must not infer from any
14 of my rulings or, for that matter, from anything I say
15 during the course of this trial that I hold any views for or
16 against any of the parties in this case. Even if I had a
17 view, it would be irrelevant because the only view that
18 counts would be reflected in your verdict. That's your job.
19 Lastly, let me point out that it's sometimes
20 easy to get wrapped up in the personalties and styles of the
21 attorneys. What's important for you as jurors to remember
22 is that this is not a contest among attorneys. Instead, it
23 is an attempt to rationally resolve a serious controversy
24 among the parties and solely on the basis of the evidence.
25 After you have seen and heard all of the

8
1 evidence, the attorneys will again address you in closing
2 arguments or statements. When they sum up, they'll point
3 out to you what they contend the evidence has shown, what
4 inferences they believe you should draw from the evidence,
5 and what conclusions they believe you should reach as your
6 verdict. What is said by the attorneys in summation, like
7 what is said by them in their opening statements or in
8 making objections or legal arguments during trial, is not
9 itself evidence. Closing statements are made in order to
10 present to you the arguments of each side based on the
11 evidence introduced. In a criminal case, the Government
12 sums up first, the defendant does so in turn, and the
13 Government is then entitled to a brief rebuttal.
14 After summations are concluded, I will
15 instruct you on the law, and you will then retire for your
16 deliberations. Your function as jurors will be to determine
17 what the facts are and apply the law that I give to you to
18 the facts as you determine them to be. The conclusion thus
19 reached must be unanimous and will be your verdict.
20 You will determine what the facts are from
21 all the testimony that you hear and the exhibits that are
22 submitted. You are the sole and exclusive judges of the
23 facts. In that field, neither I nor anyone else may invade
24 your province as the jury. I will do my best to preside
25 impartially and not to express any opinions and, as I've

9
1 said, any opinions I have would be irrelevant.
2 On the other hand, I instruct you that you
3 are bound to accept the rulings of law that I give you,
4 whether you personally agree with them or whether you do
5 not. As the sole judges of the facts, you must determine
6 which of the witnesses you believe, what portion of their
7 testimony you accept, and what weight you attach to it.
8 You may not draw any inference from any
9 question I direct not to be answered or any information I
10 direct struck as a result of any objection that is made.
11 The law requires that your decision be made solely upon the
12 competent evidence before you. Such items as I exclude from
13 your consideration you are not to consider.
14 The law does not require you to accept all of
15 the evidence just because I admit it. In determining what
16 evidence you will accept, you must make your own evaluation
17 of the testimony given by each of the witnesses and
18 determine the degree of weight you choose to give to his or
19 her testimony. The testimony of a witness may fail to
20 conform to the facts as they occurred because he's
21 intentionally telling a falsehood, because he did not
22 accurately see or hear that about which he testifies because
23 his recollection of the event is faulty or because he has
24 not expressed himself clearly giving his testimony. There's
25 no magical formula by which you evaluate testimony. As

10
1 individuals, each of you reflect the unique experiences and
2 background of your lives. If you think about it, every day
3 you determine for yourselves the reliability or
4 unreliability of statements made to you by others. The same
5 tests that you use in your daily dealings are the tests
6 which you apply in your deliberations. The interest or lack
7 of interest of any witness and the outcome of the case; the
8 bias or prejudice of a witness, if there is any; the age,
9 the appearance, the manner in which the witness gives his or
10 her testimony on the stand; the opportunity the witness had
11 to observe the facts concerning which he or she testifies;
12 the probability or improbability of the witness' testimony
13 when viewed in the light of all the other evidence in the
14 case, those are all the things that you take into
15 consideration in determining the weight, if any, you will
16 assign to that witness' testimony. If such considerations
17 make it appear that there's a discrepancy in the evidence,
18 you will have to consider whether the apparent discrepancy
19 can be reconciled by fitting stories together. If, however,
20 that which is not -- however, if that's not possible, you
21 will then determine which of the conflicting versions you
22 will accept.
23 I like to explain it in this way: You don't
24 know this yet, but you will when you go back for your
25 deliberations. A group of 12 jurors deliberating is

11
1 brighter than any single one of you. Collectively, you have
2 a lifetime's worth of experience and wisdom, and you will be
3 able to evaluate what you hear and make a collective
4 decision on what the facts are during your deliberations.
5 As the trial proceeds, it is inevitable that
6 you will have impressions of a witness or a particular
7 subject, but don't allow your impressions to become fixed or
8 hardened. Because if you do, in a sense, you foreclose
9 consideration of the testimony of other witnesses or other
10 evidence that may come later in the trial. This would be
11 unfair to one party or another. A case can be presented
12 only step by step, witness by witness, before all of the
13 evidence is presented to you. By the same token, you cannot
14 reach a verdict until you've heard all of the evidence, the
15 summations of counsel, my final instructions, and then you
16 have deliberated together. In other words, you have to
17 remain patient. That is why you ought not discuss the case
18 with one another or allow anyone to discuss it with you
19 until everything has been presented to you including the
20 closing arguments and my instructions.
21 I have already told you about the rules of
22 good conduct and I'm not going to repeat it. I think it's
23 firmly planted in your mind. I'm relying on each of you to
24 put your own screening mechanisms in your life, to prevent
25 you from being subjected to any outside influences other

12
1 than what you hear in this courtroom. Do not use your loved
2 ones to help you. Likewise, do not discuss it, as I've
3 said, among yourselves or with anyone else, and do not
4 permit yourself to be influenced by anything that might be
5 in writing or which might come to you over the air waves.
6 And do not be surfing the Internet, Tweeter, Facebook, or
7 anything else to come up with any conclusions about these
8 facts. You are going to be the experts on the facts.
9 Because you're going to hear everything you should hear to
10 help you with the judgment you must reach at the end of this
11 case.
12 There's one thing I didn't talk to you about
13 that I want to take a minute to inform you of. We've given
14 you notebooks. You see Bonnie is here now. Theresa was
15 here. This is Bonnie. Bonnie is an official court
16 reporter. She replaced Theresa from this morning. And Lisa
17 is around somewhere, and Lisa is going to help out too. So
18 you're going to have three separate court reporters. It's
19 their function to take down verbatim everything said in this
20 courtroom, and they maintain the official record. So your
21 notebooks are not the official record. The official record
22 is over here. If you have some question during your
23 deliberations about what some witness said or didn't say,
24 you're going to be able to ask for that to be repeated to
25 you, and we would do it officially from the official record.

13
1 So your notebooks are not a substitute for the official
2 record. We give them to you for whatever use you alone want
3 to make of them during the course of the trial. Some of you
4 may want to close them and put them under your seat, sit
5 back and listen and watch what's presented to you. Some may
6 want to make a note for some reason, and that's okay, but
7 they belong to each of you individually. So at the
8 conclusion of the case, the fact that one juror took notes
9 and another one might not have, or there's a discrepancy in
10 the notes, that's irrelevant. Those things belong to only
11 that juror and should not be shared with the others. So
12 they're there for whatever use you want to make them. At
13 the conclusion of the case, we're going to retrieve those
14 from you and destroy them. So you're not to take them home
15 at the end of each day. You leave them in the jury room.
16 They'll be there for you when you return the following
17 morning. And then, as I said, at the end of the case we'll
18 retrieve them.
19 Let me turn to a summary of the law as it
20 relates to the charges that are in the Indictment. Now, I'm
21 going to go over this with you in detail at the end of the
22 case, so I'm only providing you a summary at this point to
23 help you understand the evidence as it comes in piece by
24 piece so you have some perspective by which to view it.
25 There are eight counts in this Indictment

14
1 that are commonly referred to as wire and mail fraud.
2 Insofar as as the federal statute that's involved here is at
3 play, it says this:
4 Whoever, having devised any scheme and
5 artifice to defraud, to deprive another of the intangible
6 right of honest services for the purpose of executing such
7 scheme or artifice or attempting to do so mails or transmits
8 by wire communications in interstate commerce is guilty of a
9 crime. That's what the statute says.
10 In order to convict on any of the counts One
11 through Eight, the Government must prove beyond a reasonable
12 doubt the following four elements:
13 One, that the defendant devised a scheme or
14 artifice to defraud; two, for the purpose of depriving
15 another of the intangible right of honest services; three,
16 that the scheme involved a material misrepresentation or
17 omission; and four, that the use of the mails or interstate
18 wires was done in furtherance of the scheme.
19 Honest services fraud occurs when a public
20 official deprives the public of its right to have its
21 affairs conducted free from deceit, fraud, dishonesty,
22 conflict of interest or self-enrichment. It is based on the
23 premise that a public official acts as a trustee for the
24 citizens and the state and thus owes the normal fiduciary
25 duties of a trustee.
15
1 Here, the Indictment charges that the
2 defendant committed honest services fraud by failing to
3 disclose material conflicts of interest and related material
4 information. The phrase conflict of interest refers to two
5 interests. One is the interest of the government official
6 and of the public in the proper administration of the
7 official's office. The other is the official's interests in
8 his private economic affairs. A conflict of interest exists
9 whenever these two interests clash or appear to clash.
10 The public's interest in the proper
11 administration of a legislator's office includes not just
12 the legislator's formal votes. The honest services that a
13 legislator owes to citizens fairly include his informal and
14 behind the scenes influence on legislation. The official's
15 interest in his private economic affairs includes any
16 financial interest, including any interest in the receipt of
17 salary, bonuses, referral fees, consulting fees,
18 commissions, kickbacks on commissions, gifts, or any ongoing
19 stream of benefits. A public official has an affirmative
20 duty to disclose material information, including material
21 conflicts of interest. Such duty may be breached by
22 misrepresentation, omission, or concealment.
23 If you find that the defendant devised a
24 scheme in which he would breach his duty of disclosure, then
25 you may find the existence of a scheme, which is the element

16
1 of the offense that I told you was the first one. An
2 undisclosed, misrepresented, or concealed conflict of
3 interest is material if it is capable of leading a
4 reasonable person to change his or her conduct.
5 In deciding whether any nondisclosure was
6 material, you may consider whether knowledge of the
7 information would have been relevant to other legislators in
8 assessing defendant's views when deciding what position they
9 themselves should take and to the electorate in assessing
10 whether the defendant placed his financial self-interest
11 above the public interest.
12 When a material conflict of interest exists,
13 a public official is obligated to disclose the conflict of
14 interest and to recuse himself. The public official may not
15 take discretionary action directly benefiting the individual
16 or organization behind the financial interest. Conflicts of
17 interest must be disclosed because the public has a right to
18 know the potential motivations behind a public official's
19 actions. As long as a public official does not act on a
20 conflict of interest, the conflict of interest by itself
21 poses little threat to the public. One reason why the law
22 mandates disclosure of conflicts of interest, however, is
23 that it is often difficult or impossible to know for sure
24 whether a public official has acted on a conflict of
25 interest. Disclosure laws permit the public to judge for

17
1 itself whether an official has acted on a conflict of
2 interest.
3 When an official acting with intent to
4 defraud fails to disclose a material conflict of interest,
5 the public is deprived of its right to honest services
6 because it is deprived of its right either to disinterested
7 decision making itself or full disclosure as to the
8 official's potential motivation behind an official act.
9 However, it is not enough for the Government merely to prove
10 that the defendant failed to disclose such a conflict of
11 interest. Rather, the Government must prove that the
12 defendant acted with the intent to deprive the public of the
13 intangible right of honest services.
14 The Government need not prove that the
15 defendant's actions resulted in a tangible loss to the
16 public. Nor need it prove that the concealed financial
17 interests improbably influenced any official's actions. The
18 public's right to disinterested decision making is violated
19 when an official makes a decision while concealing a
20 conflict of interest which was the potential motivation for
21 that decision, even if the public did not suffer any
22 monetary loss in the transaction.
23 It is a not a defense to honest services
24 fraud that had there been no deprivation of the right to
25 honest services the defendant might have lawfully and

18
1 properly performed the same act or that the actions taken by
2 the defendant were desirable or beneficial to the public.
3 Honest services fraud is not concerned with the wisdom or
4 results of a legislative decision, but, rather, with the
5 manner in which officials make their decisions.
6 The final element in mail and wire fraud is
7 that a mailing or wire transmission is in furtherance of a
8 scheme to defraud when it is incidental to an essential part
9 of the scheme or a step in the plot. However, the
10 Government need not prove that the defendant mailed anything
11 or made a wire transmission himself. Nor need the
12 Government prove that the defendant intended that the mails
13 or wire transmissions be used, only that he caused the
14 mailing or wire transmission. Where one does an act with
15 knowledge that the use of the mails or wire transmissions
16 will follow in the ordinary course of business, or where
17 such use can reasonably be foreseen, even though not
18 actually intended, then he causes the mails or wires to be
19 used.
20 It's not necessary for the Government to
21 prove that the item itself mailed or the wire transmission
22 was false or fraudulent or contained any false or fraudulent
23 statement, representation, promise, or omission.
24 Each of the counts in the Indictment are also
25 charged under a theory that's called aiding and abetting, so

19
1 let me acquaint you, again, preliminarily, with what that
2 theory means.
3 The guilt of an accused in a criminal case
4 may be established without proof that he personally did
5 every act constituting the offense alleged. The law
6 recognizes that ordinarily anything a person can do for
7 himself may also be accomplished by him through another
8 person. Thus, the law reads as follows:
9 Whoever willfully causes an act to be done
10 which, if directly performed by him or another, would be an
11 offense against the United States, is punishable as a
12 principal, as though he committed the violation himself.
13 Under this provision, a person who causes
14 another person to commit an act which, if done with the
15 requisite intent would constitute an offense, may be found
16 guilty as a principal although he personally did not commit
17 the crime alleged. So if the defendant causes an act to be
18 done by another, then the law holds the defendant
19 responsible for the acts and conduct of such other person
20 just as though the defendant had committed the acts or
21 engaged in such conduct himself.
22 That concludes my instructions on the
23 preliminary aspects of the charges that are in the
24 Indictment. Again, I simply offer them for your guidance as
25 to the evaluation of the evidence as you hear it, and I'll

20
1 explain it in more detail at the conclusion of the case.
2 Miss Coombe, are you ready for your opening
3 statement?
4 (end excerpt.)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

T110209 US V Bruno (Preliminary Instructions)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

T110209 US V Bruno (Preliminary Instructions)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8 the United States District Court, Northern District of

9 New York, at the James T. Foley United States Courthouse,

10 445 Broadway, Albany, New York, on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2009,

11 the HON. GARY L. SHARPE, United States District Court Judge,

13 *EXCERPT - PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS

16 FOR THE GOVERNMENT:

17 UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS OFFICE - NDNY

18 BY: ELIZABETH C. COOMBE, AUSA and

19 BY: WILLIAM C. PERICAK, AUSA

21 FOR THE DEFENDANT:

22 McDERMOTT, WILL LAW FIRM

23 BY: ABBE D. LOWELL, ESQ. and PAUL M. THOMPSON, ESQ.

24 DREYER, BOYAJIAN LAW FIRM

25 BY: WILLIAM J. DREYER, ESQ. and APRIL M. WILSON, ESQ.

1 (Court commenced at 2:15 PM.)

2 THE COURT: We've got a couple of minutes

3 before we bring the jury out. Let me remind the lawyers,

4 the associates, the support team, in general the rules of

5 good conduct for them in light of the exceptions to the cell

6 phone requirements and all of that that are in play. Cell

8 owe the Courts a hundred bucks. So it's in your benefit to

9 shut those things off before you come in here.

10 MR. PERICAK: I gave mine to my secretary.

11 THE COURT: That's a good thing on your part.

12 These probably are not deductibles ... (off the record.)

13 THE COURT: I intend to provide preliminary

14 instructions to the jury, and I'll turn them over to the

15 parties for their opening statements.

16 MS. COOMBE: Your Honor, do you require the

17 parties to stand here for opening or can we use that podium?

18 THE COURT: I, I -- the parties can go

19 anywhere in the courtroom they like. I don't hold you to

20 seating arrangements or podiums or anything of the like.

23 perspective, I know Bill knows this, the lines of sight in

24 here are terrible, and I recognize them. There's nothing we

25 can do about it. And, therefore, I don't hold the defense

2 adjust so that you can see, go right ahead. That will be no

3 problem from my perspective.

4 MS. COOMBE: Would you like us to ask you

5 before we approach witnesses during examinations?

6 THE COURT: That's not necessary to the

7 extent -- not, not with me. It's not necessary.

8 MS. COOMBE: Thank you, your Honor. I have

9 one other request. Mr. Kittleson, our IT specialist, was

10 not here this morning. I wondered if I might be able to

11 introduce him to the jury, or if you would, your Honor.

12 THE COURT: You may.

13 MS. COOMBE: Thank you.

14 THE COURT: Okay.

16 THE COURT: You may be seated when you're

17 ready. Pardon me?

18 JUROR: Can we sit down?

19 THE COURT: Yes, you absolutely may. They're

20 all standing for your benefit. That's out of courtesy to

22 to your numbers. One is no more important than 12. One

23 through 12 are more important than 13 through the others,

25 certainly have to pay as close attention to everything that

2 Okay. I want to give you some preliminary

3 instructions. I'm not going to repeat everything that I

4 would ordinarily tell you at this point that we covered