Inside the windowless room, the jurors in the Bruce C. Bereano case spread hundreds of pages of checks, bills and reports on the table and floor.
They arranged and rearranged the evidence in the mail-fraud case, and checked dates. The exercise was partly for the three who were weren't immediately sure the Annapolis lobbyist was guilty.
"It was like a puzzle we put together, and all the pieces fit," said jury forewoman Natalie Yaffe, a medical secretary from Baltimore.
So imagine the jury's surprise to learn that U.S. District Judge William M. Nickerson almost dismissed the case for being weak. "We felt diametrically opposite to what the judge felt," Ms. Yaffe said yesterday, a day after the verdict.
How could a jury and a judge arrive at such different conclusions?
Perhaps the same way insiders and outsiders have such different views of the workaday dealings of legislators and lobbyists in the state capital.
"I would imagine the average lay person does not have a sense for the kind of arrangements and money that are available for those who are involved in lobbying, while people in the judiciary, people in the legislature and lawyers would be aware of it," said Byron Warnken, a professor of criminal law at University of Baltimore Law School.
"What is, in fact, accepted custom [in Annapolis] is more unusual and questionable to the person not familiar with the legislative process," he said. "This would demonstrate the old joke that in this country that there's a very fine line between proper ethical lobbying and what many people would consider bribery."
Bereano was convicted of tricking his clients into paying for thousands of dollars in illegal campaign contributions he secretly made to Maryland politicians. He told the clients the charges were for entertaining state legislators. They didn't question the items. After all, Bereano did spend heavily on meals, flowers, receptions and sports tickets for legislators.
One juror, a Baltimore homemaker who wanted to be identified only as Patricia, said, "If the government was cleaned up a bit, you wouldn't need so many lobbyists. I don't think you need any of them. They're not out there for the little people. They're out there to save the companies [who hire them] money."
The trial was a "rude awakening" for juror Alma Fielder, who works for a local Head Start program. "There are a lot of things we don't know as average citizens.
"So much money was spent to entertain legislators. That money could be going to something else, like to help the homeless and the poor," the Edgewood resident said.
Contrast the people's views to that of insider Leon G. Billings, a Montgomery County delegate who also works as a lobbyist in Washington.
Mr. Billings, a Democrat, said the mail fraud conviction is unfortunate for Bereano and for lobbyists in general because "it tends to cast an honorable profession in a dishonorable light."
Lobbyists provide legislators with detailed information on complicated issues. "We as legislators could not function without lobbyists, especially in a citizen legislature," he said.
Mr. Billings' complaints about a state lottery contract triggered the federal investigation that ultimately led to Bereano's indictment. Prosecutors found no evidence that Bereano or his client did anything wrong in winning the lottery contract.
The way Bereano and his attorneys tell it, federal prosecutors then slapped the lobbyist with minuscule charges, perhaps to justify a lengthy and extravagant investigation.
Gov. William Donald Schaefer, for whom Bereano worked tirelessly in the 1986 election, said he believed that the government treated Bereano shabbily.
"One thing the federal government did," Mr. Schaefer said, "they made up their minds years ago they were going to try to find something on Bereano and they pursued it and persisted and they eventually got a conviction. I think they spent millions and millions of dollars on this case."
When told about the lottery investigation yesterday, several jurors said the information would not have affected their ultimate decision.
Like other jurors, Ms. Yaffe said she did not know much about lobbyists when the trial began.
She did have an opinion of politicians. "Like a lot of people in the nation, I don't really think a whole lot of politicians. It's just not my favorite occupation." She said now she'd lump lobbyists in the same category as politicians.
Juror Brian Chadwick, an electrician from Columbia, said he blamed politicians for accepting freebies from lobbyists.
"I don't really fault the lobbyists for taking a politician out if the politician is going to base his decision on going out and receiving gifts from someone. I fault the politicians. It's almost naive to think they don't base part of their decision on what they get from whom," he said.
Patricia, the Baltimore homemaker, had an idea for curbing lobbying excesses. Legislators should be forced to pay taxes on their free meals, ballgame tickets and trips, she said. "It would cut down on the lobbyists' entertaining them," she explained.
Several jurors said they were not particularly troubled by the fact that Bereano's victims -- the companies he overcharged -- said they didn't feel cheated. "The companies might not have felt it -- in the scheme of things $100 is not anything to them -- but wrong is wrong," Ms. Yaffe said.
She also believes that some of his former employees were victimized by being asked to make illegal campaign contributions. "He's hiring young, inexperienced employees fresh out of school, fairly attractive ladies, and then molding them. That's a sad introduction to the workplace," she said.