Potential Stevens jurors screened for biases

Jury selection is set to finish Wednesday morning, but by the end of the day Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan had identified about 30 potential jurors. He asked 46 people whether they felt they could be impartial in a case about a public official and whether they knew any of the people who could testify as witnesses in the corruption case. He also asked many people if they thought they could be fair in deciding their verdict even if the defendant - Stevens - does not testify.

Opening statements in the trial are expected Thursday morning.

Just two potential jurors mentioned Stevens' home state when the judge asked them about their responses to one of the sole open-ended questions on the juror questionnaire: What comes to mind when you think of Alaska?

"Alaska is cold," said one potential juror, who was later released for unrelated reasons. None of the jury candidates was identified by name in court.

For the most part, the pool mirrored the population and employment base the jury is being drawn from: Washington, D.C., a city where an estimated 56 percent of the population is black and just over 53 percent of residents are women. By the end of Tuesday, the potential jurors in the pool of 30 or so included an estimated 13 black women, four lawyers, several lobbyists and numerous IT professionals and federal government employees.

The jurors paraded quickly through the courtroom, as Stevens, R-Alaska, sat quietly at the defense table with his lawyers, a frown fixed on his face most of the day. During some breaks in the proceedings, he checked his Blackberry for e-mail messages in the airy modern atrium outside the courtroom. Stevens, the longest-serving Republican in the U.S. Senate, left the proceedings about 15 minutes early.

The 84-year-old senator faces charges that he took more than $250,000 in labor, materials and furnishings from former oil services company Veco Corp. and Bill Allen, its former chief executive officer, and didn't report the gifts on his annual Senate disclosure forms. The senator is balancing his trial, his Senate duties and a tight re-election bid against Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, a Democrat.

Sullivan warned Stevens on Tuesday that it might not be the best idea to leave the courtroom during the first week of his corruption trial but that if he's needed in the Senate, the judge will explain his absence to jurors.

"I would be remiss if I didn't bring this to your attention," Sullivan told Stevens just before jury selection began. "I think it's possible that some jurors may think someone is too busy."

Stevens' lead attorney, Brendan Sullivan, wanted the judge to tell jurors that if Stevens is absent, it's because he's needed in the Senate to help address the looming financial crisis. But the judge told him he'd say only that Stevens simply wouldn't be there, but that there was nothing wrong with his absence and the jurors shouldn't speculate about it.

They included a lawyer for the telecommunications giant, Verizon, who said he has met Stevens before - and had attended a meeting with one of the senator's former top staffers, Lisa Sutherland, now a lobbyist. The lawyer said he'd been involved in disputes between the company and the Federal Communications Commission, over which Stevens wielded tremendous clout when he served as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee.

The lead prosecutor, Brenda Morris, asked the Verizon employee if it would be a problem for his own career if he sat in judgment on a jury determining whether a powerful senator is guilty of a crime.

"Would that in any way impact your profession?" Morris asked. "Would it make you uncomfortable in regard to your profession?"

The man told the judge it would not be a problem and for now remains in the pool of potential jurors.

Another lawyer/lobbyist failed to make the cut: a man with Republican ties who said he thought that he'd met Stevens before and said he was worried his political ties would make it difficult to overcome his bias in favor of the Alaska Republican senator. The lobbyist, who represents an association of home-based businesses such as Avon and Mary Kay cosmetics, described himself as "a political animal." He's never lobbied Stevens directly but probably has been at the same events, he told the judge.

"I think it would be hard for me to say I wouldn't have some inherent bias," the lobbyist told the judge. He added later, "You come into this with certain biases and beliefs, but first and foremost you have the task at hand."

"I appreciate your candor. Thank you," the judge said.

Stevens' lawyer, Brendan Sullivan, appeared eager to keep the lobbyist as a potential juror.

"This man seems to be knowledgeable, maybe opinionated," the lawyer said. "... He's exactly the kind of thoughtful, honest juror that can follow the law and instructions."

Prosecutors wanted him out, however.

"I believe he was trying his best to be honest, but there is a struggle there. ... He is a lawyer," Morris said. "He has formed a bias in this case. He has indicated that in his line of work ... and he is very active in the Republican Party."

The judge also let go another potential juror, a teacher who is a Christian Scientist who said she had religious objections to sitting in judgment on someone. He also dismissed several jurors who worked the night shift or were enrolled in college courses that conflict with the five-day-a-week trial schedule.

"We don't want you to miss any classes," the judge told one student, adding that he'd defer the man's jury service until mid-June.

"That sounds pretty good," the student said.

Judge Sullivan dismissed another potential juror who had family ties to lawyers at the firm whose attorneys are representing Stevens, and one who told the judge he thought it would be difficult to be fair because people in Stevens' position should be "held to a higher standard."

"I feel that I already have an opinion on the case. Two people from the oil company have already pled guilty to bribery," the man said. "I don't know how I would remove the things I've already read."

Most potential jurors remained in the pool, however, including a woman whom Stevens' defense team objected to for saying that she thought public officials are "supposed to serve the people ... and they're not above the law. They should always remember the people they're supposed to serve."

The judge asked her about "the fact that the senator has been indicted. ... Would you view that as wrongdoing on his part?"

"Do I feel like that means he's guilty? No," the woman said, a response that kept her in the pool.

Another juror, when he was asked about his response on a questionnaire to whether he'd ever witnessed a crime, had this to say: "If you see someone smoking marijuana at a party, that's a crime." The judge kept him in the pool.