[lbo-talk] re: conclusion to Tigar's defense of Stewart

John Mage jmage at panix.com
Wed Jan 12 07:52:37 PST 2005


John Adams asked:

>

>> The prosection rebuttal - ended earlier today - was disfigured by

>> personal ad hominem attacks on Mike. On several occasions Mike was

>> forced to interrupt the prosecutor and object, with the objections

>> sustained (i.e. approved) by the none-too-courageous judge. This is

>> most unusual. I told Mike that this was the greatest compliment

>> that could be paid to him, and that he should be generous in his

>> personal triumph.

>

> That is quite a compliment! Got any examples?

>

> John A

There were four or five other objections along the same line, but here are two. At times the rebuttal reads as if they were anticipating trying Mike Tigar as soon as they were finished with Lynne Stewart.

john mage

PROSECUTOR:

14 But I want to say one more thing about the burden of

15 proof. The fact that the government has the burden of proof

16 and the defendants have no burden to do anything is not a

17 license to ramble on about things that have nothing to do with

18 the case in an effort to confuse. And then to tell the jury

19 that you have actually done something when you haven't and all

20 you have done is given the jury theories that aren't based on

21 the evidence, think about it. Were there times when Mr. Tigar

22 was talking to you when you had to ask yourself why is he

23 talking about this? What charge or what evidence does this

24 relate to? How does this relate to the question of what we are

25 here to answer, whether Lynne Stewart is guilty or not guilty?

SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.

(212) 805-0300

12153

51BMSAT1 Rebuttal

1 Is he talking about the allegations and the charges in the

2 case?

3 MR. TIGAR: I object to attributing motives to

4 counsel.

5 THE COURT: Sustained.

PROSECUTOR:

11 And then Mr. Tigar suggests, as a fourth or fifth

12 alternative theory, that maybe the comment was actually about

13 the New York Times, not about Abu Sayyaf, not about the

14 terrorists. Good for the New York Times. But the New York

15 Times didn't report the demand so it can't be good for them for

16 reporting the demand. And she can't be saying that it's good

17 for the New York Times for not reporting the demand because

18 Mr. Tigar and Lynne Stewart keep telling us that the withdrawal

19 of support for the cease-fire was good because it was good to

20 keep Abdel Rahman's name out there.

21 MR. TIGAR: I object to what Mr. Tigar allegedly told

22 about the cease-fire, your Honor.

23 THE COURT: All right. Sustained.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list