Vol XXIX
Volume XXIX consists solely of procedural proceedings during jury deliberations — no witnesses testified and no evidence was introduced. The morning session (8:54–9:05 a.m.) addressed the replacement of Juror Number 22, who had been exposed to outside information about a 'bribe' when a family member reacted to learning she was sequestered. The court substituted Alternate Juror Number 78 after a brief on-the-record inquiry confirming he had received no case information. The afternoon session was a telephonic conference (1:31–1:38 p.m.) addressing a jury question asking whether jurors could take their notes back to the hotel for individual review; the court, with general defense agreement, allowed this with the qualification that jurors could not deliberate or discuss notes with anyone outside formal deliberations. These are the only events captured in this volume. Defense counsel should note the juror-contamination incident: a family member's spontaneous reference to a 'bribe' suggests the case had significant public/media profile at the verdict stage, which is a potential basis for a Remmer-type hearing inquiry in any future proceeding.
No substantive testimony occurred in this volume. The session was limited entirely to deliberations-phase procedural matters. The government made no affirmative strategic moves. The AUSA agreed without objection to the court's proposed juror substitution procedure and to the jury's request to take notes to the hotel.
- JUROR CONTAMINATION RECORD: The family member's spontaneous reference to a 'bribe' during sequestration (page 6907) is a significant record fact. In any post-verdict challenge or retrial, a Remmer hearing request should be evaluated. The court declined to canvass all sequestered jurors about their call-home contacts — that decision is preserved in the record and is worth revisiting. - SEARCH WARRANT: Obtain Case No. 24-mj-382 (the search warrant application). The government agreed it is a public document. Review it for misrepresentations or overstatements of the evidence that could form the basis of a suppression motion or challenge in your case. - THIS VOLUME HAS NO TESTIMONY: Vol XXIX is purely procedural — deliberations phase only. No witnesses, no exhibits, no regulatory characterizations to challenge. Do not spend time on it beyond these procedural issues. - DELIBERATION NOTE POLICY: The court's allowance of individual note review at the hotel (pages 6915–6919), while conditioned, is unusual and Sapone's concern about solo deliberation outside the group context is legally sound. If any verdict irregularity emerged in deliberations, this ruling provides a potential hook. - JURY SEQUENCE: Juror 22 was the second juror released during this trial (the court noted 'two released jurors' at page 6913). Understanding the full jury composition history — who was seated, who was released, and when — is important for any structural challenge to the verdict.
There was no substantive testimony or evidence to contest in this volume. Defense counsel performed appropriately on the procedural matters. Goetz preserved a legitimate concern about potential juror contamination of remaining jurors on the record (page 6909), which is the right instinct. However, Birrell actively opposed any further inquiry of remaining jurors (page 6913), which may have been a strategic miscalculation — a more thorough canvass could have either uncovered contamination or insulated the verdict from later challenge. Sapone appropriately flagged the note-review concern during deliberations (page 6915–6916), preserving a potential issue. The request for the search warrant application (Goetz) was a sound discovery move.