Closing Arguments Set in CIA Leak Case

WASHINGTON -- Prosecutors who spent more than three years on the CIA leak case, like the defense lawyers on the other wide, have been given just three hours to make their final arguments to jurors.

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who led the investigation, wanted more time to argue Tuesday that former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby lied to the FBI, then blamed his lies on a faulty memory.

Defense attorney Theodore Wells said he needed about four hours to argue that Libby never lied but rather honestly forgot his conversations with reporters regarding outed CIA employee Valerie Plame.

Such a schedule would have pushed closing arguments into Wednesday, something U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton didn't want. Walton _ who has tried to keep the monthlong trial from becoming a debate on the war in Iraq, a study of the science of memory or an examination of mass media scruples _ held firm at three hours for each side.

Prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg will go first, recounting for jurors that in mid-2003, Plame's husband Joseph Wilson rankled the White House by accusing the Bush administration of doctoring prewar intelligence on Iraq. While trying to publicly discredit Wilson, prosecutors say, Libby told reporters that Plame worked for the CIA.

Plame was outed publicly by reporter Robert Novak, who touched off an FBI investigation with a July 2003 syndicated column. Though Libby wasn't the Novak source, prosecutors say he feared he'd be charged with discussing classified information with other reporters.

So, prosecutors say, Libby lied. He told investigators that he learned about Plame from Cheney, then forgot about it until a month later, when he was surprised to hear it during a phone call with NBC's Tim Russert.

That call is the key to Libby's defense. Anything he told reporters about Plame, Libby testified, wasn't official government information. It was just rumors he heard from Russert. Russert testified that exchange never happened.

Wells will follow Zeidenberg with a much different story. He argues Libby was swamped with national security issues and honestly forgot that Cheney told him about Plame.

Wells will try to discredit former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who testified that Libby told her about Plame days before the Russert conversation. Miller's testimony was inconsistent and her memory is spotty, too, Wells says.

He was expected to remind jurors that Libby's former deputy recalled his "awful memory." And he'll note, as he did during opening statements, that the government's key witnesses all have memory failings of their own or a motive to lie.

Fitzgerald was to follow Wells with a 90-minute rebuttal. The jury will receive final instructions from the judge and begin deliberating on Wednesday.

___

Associated Press writer Michael J. Sniffen contributed to this report.