|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:You can mount a defense, in theory, to just about any crime without testifying. I was on a jury at one point for a racketeering case, and none of the four defendants (each of whom brought their own lawyer) testified for that. In fact, they didn't bring any witnesses or evidence of their own; their entire defense consisted of attacking the prosecution's witnesses and evidence. The defense rested a few seconds after the prosecution did. (In fact, they accidentally attempted to do so first, which prompted the judge to jokingly ask them afterwards whether they had something to say when they hesitated to do it a second time. Everyone laughed. It was a long eight weeks, okay?) Now, in the case of this particular set of people, that strategy didn't really work out, but I don't think there was anything wrong with it on principle. They were just incredibly, incredibly guilty. I could definitely see having delivered a different verdict with exactly the same tactics if the attacks on the witnesses had been more effective or if the evidence hadn't consisted of literal hours of wiretap of the defendants admitting to their crimes. Speaking as a juror, I don't think any of those four people testifying would have changed anything for the better, and it was probably wise of their defense team not to have them try.
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2024 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 01:47 |
|
|
I legitimately enjoyed my jury service, even though it was long. If you haven't done it, and you serving isn't going to get anyone killed, I highly recommend doing it at least once in your life. (I've been called five times but only served twice, though not for lack of trying.)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2024 21:44
|
|