◆ SpookStack

fA Ra ts ee See Rr perenne ree sneer i oN py 12 on the basis of comparing what they had seen’on the videotape with what they had seen of Myers on the witness stand. This court did not see a need for individual voir dire of the jurors in the Myers case, although it did appear to be called for in the Thompson and Lederer trials. When the Myers defendants came to trial in August, 1980, much. of the publicity about Abscam that had occurred in February and March had been forgotten. In the initial inquiry to the full panel of jurors, substantially less. than 50% of the jurors could even recall Abscam or anything - about it. By way of contrast, after the heavy publicity given to the Myers trial, a much larger proportion of the jurors recognized the name “Abscam" and had some familiarity with it by the time of the Thompson and Lederer trials. Even in those later cases, however, the questioning of | the jurors themselves revealed, at most, only passing recogni - tion of Abscam. The multiple voir dire technique used with Myers has not been shown, nor even claimed to have caused, any prejudice to any of the Myers défendants; all of whom were virtually unknown in the New York-Long Island _ area prior to February, 1980. The Myers defendants urge Brady violations £rom the government's failure to supply them with a variety of bits of information claimed to bear ‘on Weinberg's credibil- ity. While it is true that there were some events about