Nothing is left undone or unsaid which can tend to prejudice the public mind, and produce a conviction without evidence… They [the attacks] are practiced against me… not only with impunity, but with applause; and the authors and abettors suppose, with reason, that they are acquiring favour with the administration. 	

This letter serves to highlight the bitter public battle occurring, with those supporting Jefferson campaigning to discredit not only Burr, but Marshall as well. Jefferson at this point was committing the resources of the presidency to secure public opinion and a conviction. The mention of Nicholas as a highly prejudiced juror reflects the proceedings of the trial itself, when Burr challenged the objectivity both Nicholas and another man, William Giles. This resulted in Marshall brokering a compromise, stipulating that those who had publicly stated an opinion regarding Burr’s guilt could not serve. 	 Although everyone had heard about and presumably had some opinion to Burr’s guilt or innocence, Marshall attempted to preserve some sanctity in the process due to the extreme nature of the case, that of treason.
	Jefferson’s fixation with the trial went beyond shaping public opinion, but also to shaping the prosecution itself. George Hay, the lead prosecutor of the case, received no less than fourteen letters from Jefferson from late May through early September in 1807, the most heated months of the summer-long trial.  Jefferson was direct in his letters, providing specific instructions on strategy, what he expected from Hay, and information that could help convict Burr. In one such letter he expressed his past frustration with Marshall, stating, “ I [Jefferson] have long wished for a proper occasion to have the gratuitous opinion in Marbury v. Madison brought before the public, & denounced as not law; & I think the present a fortunate one, because it occupies such a place in the public attention. I should be glad… [if] you could take occasion to express the determination of the executive, that the doctrines of that case were given extrajudicially & against law.”  Jefferson continues, imploring Hay that even “if this opinion should not be your own, I would wish it to be expressed merely as that of the executive.”  In other words, Jefferson wished not only to make the trial about Burr and his presumed guilt, but also a referendum on Marshall and their past confrontations. 
	Meanwhile, Marshall again issued a decision antagonizing Jefferson, in response to a request by Burr for a subpoena to Jefferson regarding a letter used by Jefferson in addressing Congress and proclaiming Burr’s guilt.  Marshall, after lengthy debate by both sides, issued the subpoena and justified it through the right of the accused to have access to documents and testimony that are relevant to his defense.  Again, Marshall stood by his belief in providing as fair a trial as possible, even when the issue at hand is requiring action by the chief executive. Jefferson, for his part, vociferously objected to this action. 