 Blagojevich's defense team rested their case Wednesday without
calling a single witness. Trial lawyers said the stunning move may
have caught prosecutors off guard and could force them to adjust
their strategy, which included cross-examining Blagojevich and
potentially offering tough rebuttal witnesses."I think the
government was outfoxed by him," said Leonard Cavise, a DePaul
University law professor.
Blagojevich will not face embarrassing questions about evidence
that he spent $200,000 on suits while going deep in debt, used
profanities to describe some of the nation's top leaders and hid in
the bathroom to avoid meetings. But jurors are unlikely to overlook
the fact that defense attorneys promised for months that he would
testify to tell his side.
"I think the cross-examination would have been devastating," said
Ron Safer, former head of the criminal division of the U.S.
attorney's office and now in private practice. "But I think the
silence is also devastating."
Blagojevich, 53, has pleaded not guilty to scheming to sell or
trade President Barack Obama's former Senate seat for a Cabinet
post, an ambassadorship, a high-paying job outside government or a
massive campaign contribution. He also pleaded not guilty to
plotting to launch a racketeering operation in the governor's
office.
His brother, Robert Blagojevich, a 54-year-old Nashville, Tenn.,
businessman, is also on trial and has pleaded not guilty to taking
part in the alleged scheme.
Blagojevich stood before U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel and
announced his decision.
"Is it your decision not to testify?" Zagel asked.
"It is my decision," Blagojevich responded, nodding slightly. He
sat down smiling.
Blagojevich later told reporters he believed all along that he
would testify and only reluctantly reconsidered on the advice of his
lawyer.
Attorney Sam Adam's "most compelling argument, and I believe the
one that swayed me, was that the government in their case proved my
innocence. They proved I did nothing illegal, and there was nothing
further for us to add," Blagojevich said.
The 74-year-old Adam, one of Chicago's most experienced defense
attorneys, took charge of Blagojevich's case months ago and has long
been influential with the former governor.
Adam's son, attorney Sam Adam Jr., said he disagreed with the
decision to keep Blagojevich off the witness stand.
A person with knowledge of the defense told The Associated Press
on Tuesday night that the pair had gone to Zagel and said they
wanted to rest without calling witnesses, and that the judge gave
them a night to sleep on it. The person insisted on anonymity
because the exchange between the lawyers and the judge was
confidential.
The elder Adam said after court Wednesday that the decision not
to testify was made after the prosecution failed to call two key
figures in its case, convicted political fixers Tony Rezko and
Stuart Levine.
Chicago's federal courthouse was swept by whispers Wednesday that
the government had been prepared to call the two men after
Blagojevich as rebuttal witnesses. Prosecutors declined to comment.
Blagojevich does not have to worry about prosecutors pointing to
his decision next week, when they give their closing arguments.
That's against the rules, and Zagel is likely to instruct jurors
that in their deliberations they should not consider whether he
testified.
[to top of second column] |
Experts contacted by The Associated Press on Wednesday were
divided on the defense claim that the government had failed to make
the case and thus no defense was needed.
Professor Ronald Allen of the Northwestern University law school
said it was "a compelling case on a number of counts."
"A lot of it is circumstantial," Allen said, but he added that
direct evidence of bribery and extortion is rare.
"People aren't stupid -- they don't always state exactly what
they are trying to do" when they commit crimes, he said.
John Beal, a former Justice Department attorney now in criminal
defense practice, said he had the impression that the defense caught
the government by surprise.
He said the government's evidence seemed to lack some key
ingredients.
"Neither Blagojevich nor his campaign fund received any money,"
Beal said. He said money changing hands isn't necessarily required
to find Blagojevich guilty on some of the charges, but jurors may
not be convinced of that. And the fact that Blagojevich's wife,
Patti, was paid by Rezko may not be sufficient to persuade jurors
that her husband was guilty, he said.
"They want to be convinced that you did something wrong," Beal
said. "They're using heavy- hitting charges that make the jury think
he must be required to have done something wrong, and then it turns
out he never received any money."
Attorneys said Wednesday that the ambiguity of the case was
guaranteed to keep jurors deliberating for a long time, and there
would be no snap verdict. Unlike civil cases where juries decide on
the preponderance of the evidence, a conviction of Blagojevich
requires jurors to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
"If this were a civil case, I would call it a slam-dunk," says
David Yellen, dean of the Loyola University law school. "They
certainly came close to proving some criminal violations, but
whether they got over the hump is open to question."
When court resumes Thursday, the judge planned to rule on a
routine request to throw out some or all of the charges against
Blagojevich and his brother. Such motions are common but are rarely
granted.
[Associated Press;
By MIKE ROBINSON and MICHAEL TARM]
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.
 |
