Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Gina Mignola then made her case for the prosecution. She defended Bartley's decision not to launch an inquiry into the juror's note, saying that the judge was exercising his judgment in choosing not to interfere with jury proceedings.
"You don't want to stick your nose in," she said.
Mignola also said that investigators after the trial had learned that the juror had reconciled with the fellow juror who had seemed to threaten her.
Mazzarelli seemed skeptical, repeatedly asking whether Mignola was suggesting that the court could evaluate the judge's decision not to investigate in light of facts that were learned only after the case concluded. Mignola said that the later facts simply showed that the judge's instinct had been sound.
Mignola also argued that the court should not consider Marshall's age or health, saying he would be well cared for in prison and that failing to imprison him would let him "get away with it."
She said that, while Marshall had paid back $12 million in restitution, he had not acknowledged any wrongdoing.
"You can't have it both ways," she said. "I'm not guilty but please reduce my sentence anyway."
The subject of what punishment would be appropriate for Marshall prompted Andrias to raise the question of whether his extraordinary wealth and privilege should be considered.
"Do we look at him as just another person? Because he's not," Andrias said.
Mignola agreed, saying that Astor had already lavished money and gifts on her son throughout his life.
Subscribe to New York Law Journal
