The confession in Gray v. Maryland (1998) 523 U.S. 185 [118 S. Ct. 1151, 140 L. Ed. 2d 294] referred directly to the existence of the nonconfessing defendant. It was redacted by removing the defendant's name and replacing it with either the word "deleted" or a blank space set off by commas. "The inferences at issue here involve statements that, despite redaction, obviously refer directly to someone, often obviously the defendant, and which involve inferences that a jury ordinarily could make immediately, even were the confession the very first item introduced at trial. Moreover, the redacted confession with the blank prominent on its face, in Richardson's (Richardson v. Marsh) words, 'facially incriminates' the codefendant. Id., at 209 [107 S. Ct. at p. 1708]. Like the confession in Bruton v. United States (1968) itself, the accusation that the redacted confession makes 'is more vivid than inferential incrimination, and hence more difficult to thrust out of mind.' 481 U.S., at 208 [107 S. Ct. at pp. 1707-1708]." (523 U.S. at p. 196 [118 S. Ct. at p. 1157].)