From The New York Times…
Judge Chides Defense in Official’s Trial
By Benjamin Weiser
The jury in the federal corruption trial of City Councilman Larry B. Seabrook was sent home on Tuesday evening after deliberating for a third full day without reaching a verdict.
The jury told the judge on Monday that it was at an impasse on all 12 counts in the case, in which Mr. Seabrook, a Bronx Democrat, has been accused of participating in a series of fraud schemes to direct more than $1 million in taxpayer money to nonprofit groups he controlled, so that he could then funnel money to family members and friends.
On Tuesday, federal prosecutors accused Mr. Seabrook’s lawyers of making comments outside court that could influence the jury’s deliberations.
Writing to Judge Robert P. Patterson Jr. of Federal District Court in Manhattan, prosecutors cited comments by one lawyer, Anthony L. Ricco, to reporters after deliberations ended on Monday that the jury “hasn’t accepted the government’s theory of the case.”
Mr. Ricco was also quoted as saying that he hoped jurors would “continue to deliberate but not really abandon their heartfelt views.” And, he added, “People shouldn’t be asked to compromise their views for efficiency or expediency.”
In court, the judge cited the prosecutors’ letter and said it was unfortunate that news accounts of Mr. Ricco’s statements “could interfere” with the deliberations. He cautioned Mr. Seabrook’s lawyers to “be careful” about what they said to the news media.
In their letter, prosecutors said Mr. Ricco’s comments were “misleading” because deliberations were continuing and the jury “plainly has not yet accepted or rejected any theory.”
Although the judge had warned jurors not to read news accounts of the case, prosecutors said, there remained a risk that they could inadvertently be exposed to such reports.
Mr. Ricco’s comment that jurors “shouldn’t be asked to compromise their views,” prosecutors added, “could have the effect of hardening the lack of consensus and negating any further instructions by the court that the jurors should keep an open mind to each other’s views so that they may in good faith reach a consensus if one is available.”
“The government’s concern is a valid one,” Mr. Ricco said later on Tuesday. “We have the same concern.” At day’s end, Mr. Seabrook, joined by lawyers outside the courthouse, told reporters, “Well, I will continue to have faith, faith in the Creator and certainly faith in the jury system.”
Mr. Ricco said, “We’re hoping that the jury will continue its deliberations and reach a just verdict.”
The jury’s notes on Tuesday offered no further clues about the impasse. One request listed more than two dozen exhibits; another said simply, “We would like a calculator.”
Colin Moynihan contributed reporting.
