TACOMA, Washington -- A federal jury convicted Internet essayist Jim Bell on Tuesday of two of five counts of stalking government agents.
But in an unusual twist, the 12-member jury revealed it had split 11-1 on three charges, which prompted U.S. District Judge Jack Tanner to dismiss those counts after deciding he could not order jurors to continue deliberating after a partial verdict.
"The verdict will be accepted," Tanner said. "The jury will now be excused."
The decision caps a six-day trial of Bell, whose "Assassination Politics" essay in 1996 attracted the scrutiny of IRS agents who then conducted a series of investigations into Bell's personal affairs, political affiliations and posts to the cypherpunks mailing list.
Bell was found guilty of stalking Jeff Gordon, a former IRS agent now with the Treasury Department who spearheaded a prior investigation of Bell. One of the two offenses was a violation of 18 U.S.C. 2261A, which prohibits crossing a state line with the intent to "harass another person" and carries a prison term of up to five years.
The other violation involved using a fax machine to send a letter to Gordon.
The jury deadlocked on charges involving Mike McNall, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent. Bell researched both people last year, attempting to find their addresses through CD-ROMs and Internet searches, in what he described as an effort to uncover government wrongdoing.
Tanner commissioned a probation report on Bell and set a sentencing date for July 6.
Robert Leen, Bell's defense attorney, said that irregularities in the strange jury result -- usually juries don't report their closed-door deliberations -- will provide a firm footing for an appeal to the 9th Circuit.
Leen noted that the jury never completed the official verdict form, and that the charge involving a fax machine specifies a "course of conduct," but Bell was only accused of sending one allegedly harassing fax message. After the confusion over what to do with a partial verdict became apparent, Leen unsuccessfully asked the judge to declare a mistrial.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robb London said he was not "prepared to respond" to a question from Wired News about whether the government would seek to try Bell again on the three counts that the judge dismissed.
During closing arguments earlier in the day, London depicted Bell as a kind of cyberterrorist wannabe, pointing to the defendant's dislike for the IRS, his knowledge of chemistry, and his authorship of "Assassination Politics" as reasons for the jury to convict.
London said Bell was engaged in "a deliberate attempt to intimidate and harass," and repeatedly referred to a 1997 guilty plea in which Bell admitted to stink-bombing the carpet outside an IRS office, collecting the names of IRS agents, and writing "Assassination Poltics." Bell said on Monday he was coerced into signing the plea.
Bell never recanted "Assassination Politics," London complained. He said that Bell is "still advocating the assassination or elimination of federal agents."
Leen, the defense attorney, took a far different approach: He argued that Bell is a man with psychological issues, but did not intend to harass anyone.
"This is a brilliant man with a brilliant mind. It is not functioning well at all," Leen said.
On Monday, Bell had accused Leen in court of threatening his life.
"Even if a man is scary or perhaps poses some future danger, it is not your job to take care of Mr. Bell or to send a message," Leen said.
He told the jurors to put aside their personal feelings toward Bell: "You must apply the law to Mr. Bell whether you like it or not."
After about two hours of deliberation, the jury asked for clarification about the definition of "intent." Tanner refused to provide it, and told them to reread their jury instructions.
At one point during the long afternoon wait for the verdict, Bell joked to reporters and his lawyer: "Tell them to split the baby. Half of me can stay inside, and half of me can be released."
Bell indicated he had expected to be released, and asked his parents to drive from their home in Vancouver, Washington to pick him up. They were unable to attend the trial because the government threatened to call them as witnesses against their son, but in the end did not.
