Before getting on to the rest of the testimony, I’m going to talk about some of the atmospherics in the courtroom.
Both the lawyers and judge were very well prepared and effective. Judge Biggers had specific issues about the legal standards he wanted addressed, and the lawyers responded. I think the defense goal here had to be a chance to do some discovery, and they achieved it in a big way. Being very careful not to antagonize the judge, Keker created an opportunity to put on and cross-examine two major witnesses for the prosecution– Balducci and the FBI agent. And while Balducci bloodied Keker a couple of times (particularly on the Wilson bribe), there was no jury presence– not just better now than later, but now is a good time. Keker was exploring Balducc’s testimony more like a deposition– asking “why” questions about what Balducci had done that a skilled lawyer avoids in a trial cross-examination. He got a free shot to explore Balducci’s story, and used it as much as the judge would let him.
Balducci was a very effective witness. He was calm. When he parried with Keker, it didn’t really come off as trying to best another lawyer– he had a very convincing “I’m just answering the questions” demeanor. The arrogance that can come across from him in the transcripts is either gone or he kept it under wraps. And none of the colorful language (“sweet potatoes” “corn on the ground”) of the transcripts, either.
Scruggs spent Balducci’s testimony looking at his lawyer or anywhere but at Balducci. If he looked at Balducci, I didn’t notice it.
Zach’s lawyer and Frank Trapp for Backstrom each asked to say something at different points, and the judge said he was only going to hear from one lawyer to a side on each thing. In some ways, Keker invited that by the way he introduced himself at the beginning.
The crowd in the afternoon was slightly thinner. Tony Farese was there for a bit, with Shane Langston. What was Shane Langston doing there? I could speculate. It is an interesting question.
I’ve got another post to do about the motion arguments and probably several about the testimony about the FBI agent.
If I knew how to buy you a round of drinks, NMC…. you’ve certainly earned it
NMC, can you elaborate on why Keker was the only one allowed on defense to question the gov’t witness.
This stinks at first glance, but there must be some logical explanation.
Does filing of joint motions by all 3 defs. instead of 3 identical motions by each defs. result in some type of waiver?
nows your chance, My Thoughts– I’m headed to the City Grocery bar.
If you had only given me a little better notice…
I’d rather buy him a bottle of his favorite beverage, have him sit down all relaxed-like, have a quck sip or two and continue….
I agree, I was impressed with Balducci. I had this idea of him as some sniveling whiner who got busted and was trying to look like the victim, not to mention arrogant and northernish (yeah, I went there…it’s ok though, I was born and raised in Jersey so I can say it.)
But he performed well yesterday.
Bad news for Team Scruggs there, Alyssa. What was your overall impression of the day (before we get our official peek at it this afternoon)?
What was Shane Langston doing there? I could speculate. It is an interesting question.
Ye-e-es . . . ?
Dickie seemed to be good spirits.
Note to foloers: I’m given to understand that “Alyssa” will no longer join us here, but her twin sis “LydiaLaw” will sub for her.
Welcome to folo, Lydjah!
Here’s I’ll dissent in a minor way from LydiaLaw: Scruggs seemed to be making an effort to seem normalish but did not seem in good spirits to me. I’d say quite stressed and queasy. But this is the problem of just watching and surmising, isn’t it, LyrdiaLaw? We don’t really know.
From what I understand Farese is now representing Joey in a matter that his brother was once handling for him and yesterday there was a meeting in the Oxpatch between the two sides.
Meeting or no, I think if I were Shane I’d stay far away from that courtroom. Same for Mike Moore.