The Italian War Crimes prosecutors continue their reviews of the independence of the American judicial system. There is some information giving them concern. 

The Wecht Jury Tampering Is related to the
Nuremberg Precedents. The Tampering may be considered by war crimes
prosecutors during their prosecution decisions.

It remains to be understood how the President and Associated Press supported this alleged illegal activity through media messages and domestic propaganda from contractors.

Clearly Established Wecht Jury Tampering

The FBI contacts with the juror members would qualify is illegal jury tampering. Jury tampering includes, but is not limited to, prospective cases.

There is substantial evidence in the court record showing the jury tampering was linked with a prospective trial. The record shows the US Attorney did
intend to retry the case after the first case. When asked if the government planned a second trial,

Stephen S. Stallings jumped from his seat and said: "We do, your honor, and we will."

All post-trial contact -- between the FBI and juror, whose  names who are sealed -- was improper. The President, DOJ, US Attorney, and FBI knew or should have known this contact was illegal.

The aim was
to gather information, to harass the jury members, and send a signal --
as was done with the Valarie Plame outing -- that jury members "need to
be careful".

The statute shows the post-trial communications were illegal: They were with people the President, US Attorney, and FBI knew had had their names sealed. Nuremberg well discusses the use of force, intimidation, and propaganda to consolidate power:

"Training and propaganda films were produced on an elaborate scale."

Jury Tampering For Second Planned Trial

The President and US Attorney intended to prosecute Wecht Again. The goal of the illegal jury tampering was to gather information for the second trial. It is not out of the question for juror members for the second trial to be part of the first trial proceedings, as a witness, observer:

"At least one prospective juror in the second trial had attended the first trial."

Here is the concern from the perspective of a court officer, lawyer, or judicial branch. Westmoreland County defense attorney Tom Ceraso:

"If I'm a prospective juror in the second trial, and I'm hearing stories that if I don't agree with the government that I might get calls from the FBI. . . " [that might affect my judgment, thinking, or independence]

The Statute Covering Jury Tampering

The sample language from the statute bears examining in light of Nuremberg. The US Attorney did release invalid information about the jury deliberations, incorrectly stating the majority supported prosecutions. In truth, the majority concluded the opposite: That Wecht was not guilty.

Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens,
or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages
in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to

There were improper US Attorney statements made about the Wecht jury conclusions. To what extent was the jury tampering after the trial made with the intent to influence others at the planned second trial:

(2)
otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,

The war crimes tribunal must examine to what extent the President, US Attorney, and FBI agents cooperated with the intent to harass these jurors; and affect the planned second trial of Wecht:

Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from—

(1)
attending or testifying in an official proceeding;