* 2:42 pm - From the Sun-Times…
Rod Blagojevich’s defense lawyers filed a bid for a mistrial, saying that Judge James Zagel’s repeated rulings against them have kept them from telling their side of the story.
“Defense counsel has been systematically prevented from engaging in meaningful cross-examination by unwarranted sustaining of objections,” Blagojevich’s lawyers wrote in the filing. “The result is the deprivation of a fair trial and a mistrial is warranted.”
They also complained about Zagel’s comments in front of jurors, citing one remark from Zagel: “Don’t do that, now we‟re getting into the mind-reading of the prosecution.”
“Moreover, by ruling on these “mind reading” objections orally in front of the jury, it sends an inappropriate message to the jury (when only the defense is sustained on these questions).”
Read the entire motion by clicking here…
Defense counsel has been systematically prevented from engaging in meaningful cross-examination by unwarranted sustaining of objections. The result is the deprivation of a fair trial and a mistrial is warranted. […]
The court has ruled that questioning by the defense has gone beyond the scope of direct. In numerous instances, this finding has been erroneous, where indeed the government opened the door to that line of questioning. […]
Defendant moves this court for a mistrial. In the alternative, defense counsel urges this Court to order the government to state the basis upon which it objects, and urges the court to limit the distracting manner in which prosecutors signal to witnesses by persistently standing to object (many times prior to defense counsel even asking a question). It is a distraction for the jury and serves no legitimate purpose.
Welcome to the big leagues, gentlemen.
*** UPDATE 1 - 3:47 pm *** Denied…
A barely audible Judge James Zagel is explaining his repeated upholding of prosecution’s objections after Rod Blagojevich’s defense team asked for a mistrial today.
“I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a motion for a mistrial based on objections,” Zagel says. […]
Zagel said he believes lawyers are asking the questions the wrong way — beginning the questions in such a manner that the witness would have to guess what someone was thinking. Zagel noted the defense hasn’t objected much (indeed, today, just one even though the government’s most significant witness has been on the stand all day).
But the bottom line: Zagel said the defense can hand him a list of questions they think he should have allowed and he’d consider them.
Zagel said he saved Sam Adam Jr. and his client a level of resentment from the jury because he kept him from asking of the same questions time and again.
“I’d do it again, because I believe it is in the interest of justice to do so,” Zagel said.
As a commenter said earlier, the defense was probably just trying to “work the refs” a bit here. Others have suggested they’re setting up an appeal. There would always be an appeal. That doesn’t mean, however, that RRB is not doomed. He is.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 2:48 pm:
More flailing about by the defense. In this case, I think they want the mistrial motion in the record to help establish something on appeal.
The simple fact remains, on cross examination, the questions must pertain to answers previously made by the witness. If the defense wants to get new information from a witness to the jury, the defense needs to re-call those witnesses as part of the defense. Then they can ask whatever they want (within reason).
Although Zagel would be well served by asking the prosecution to state reasons for their objections, as monotonous as that would surely be.
It’s clear the defense is doing everything possible to muddy this up for the jury. What does that tell you about their strategy?
- Scooby - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 2:49 pm:
Oh man, that headline just ruined my day. Now when I read the motions I’m going to hear them narrated by Fredo in my head. Like there aren’t already enough voices up there.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 2:52 pm:
Wow. The excuses are coming awfully early. Gee, Sam, you think your client might be convicted?
The Adam’s Family (da da da da, click, click) creepy and kooky reputation was built on the R. Kelly acquittal. Everyone and their brother knows they won the case by buying off the victim and the witnesses.
What a contrast we have with Zagel and Blago. On the one hand, a real public servant. On the other, a moronic thief.
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 2:53 pm:
Clearly Sam Adams Jr has watched “My Cousin Vinny” once too many times. There is ZERO chance that in the end the old curmudgen Zagel is going to find Sam Adams Jr’s antics ‘endearing’.
Perhaps he needs to say “Youts” a few times and see what that gets him.
- Amused - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 2:56 pm:
The Adams family are making themselves a joke. This may be thier undoing as defense attorneys in the future when their so-called defense crumbles.
- Loop Lady - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 2:59 pm:
what a crock of…well, you know…Sam gets his comeuppance at last…the folks @ 26th and California are breaking out in laughter…
- Elizabeth - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:03 pm:
This is Big Boy School. If the Adams think they’ve got even a snowball’s chance on a motion like this with Zagel as the trial judge in the 7th Circuit, they’re even further out of their league than I imagined. Did they even consider how it would further endear them to Zagel?
- Those Crazy Kids - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:03 pm:
They seem to be gearing up for the appeal.
- Niles Township - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:04 pm:
I knew Sam couldn’t hack federal court. He’s too 26 & Cal to make it downtown.
- Dan S, a taxpayer and a Cubs Fan - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:08 pm:
Remember Blago once said that the only thing he feared was the truth…….
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:10 pm:
An Innocent Man - Joel, enhanced by VanillaMan
Some candidates won’t knock on a door
Afraid they might be turned away
They have sycophants whom they adore
Telling them the Election’s going their way
Some people live with the fear of the law
And the anger that a judge might show
They will not collect campaign funds
Claiming it’s evil to collect all that dough
I know they’re only protecting themselves
I know they’re not thinking a bit about me
I fought for working people like you
But I’m not above
Expecting to get something for that love
You’ve been denying you supported me
After I supported you on everything
I restored faith in government, after Ryan
These peers will see I haven’t been lyin’
This trial is only for kangaroos
But still I’m not singing the blues
Because I am an innocent man
Oh yes I am
an innocent man
Some people say they will never believe
Another promise they hear from my lips
Because they only remember too well
How politicians like to flop and flip
Some people have no brush for their hair
Let alone a fine Paul Mitchell like mine
Some people find that’s it’s easier to hate
Than to listen to me anymore
I know you don’t want to hear what I say
I know you’re gonna keep turning away
But I’ve been there and if I can survive
I can stay alive
I’m not above going through it again
I’m not above being cool for a while
If you’re cruel to me I’ll understand
Because I am an innocent man
Oh yes I am
an innocent man
Some people run from a possible fight
Some people figure they can never win
And although this is a trial I may lose
The accused is an innocent man
Oh yes I am
An innocent man
- Crystal Clear - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:32 pm:
If you listen to talk radio in Chicago, specifically WLS, all they keep talking about is that there is no smoking gun. tThat they haven’t proved that Blago got anything for all of his scheming. The problem is for Blago that the consipracy to even attempt to get something of value in echange for something from the Governor’s office is a federal crime. Those idiots on WLS just don’t get it or they don’t want to get it…
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:33 pm:
===specifically WLS, all they keep talking about is that there is no smoking gun===
Stop listening to that moronic station. Seriously. They’re almost all idiots. Except Rowe, and I’m even wondering about him of late.
- Crystal Clear - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:35 pm:
They never talk about the conspiracy aspect, even Rowe…
- OneMan - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:37 pm:
== Stop listening to that moronic station. Seriously. They’re almost all idiots. Except Rowe, and I’m even wondering about him of late. ==
They just hired Eddie and Jobo to do a weekend shift…
Enough said.
- Edison Parker - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:39 pm:
Don and Roma. Roe Conn and Andy Shaw are morons because they don’t know whatbthe phrase “smoking gun” runs to when they use it to show no direct link to quid pro quo; that is it is all circumstantial evidence linking him to the conspiracy. Twice I have heard Andy Shaw actually say “there hasn’t been a smoking gun, it’s all been circumstantial.”
That’s exactly what a “smoking gun” is; circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is an eyewitness seeing someone shoot the gun. Circumstantial is someone coming in the room and seeing someone holding a smoking gun inferring it was just shot.
They keep confusing “smoking gun” for direct evidence. Makes me cringe.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:41 pm:
EP, that’s a perfect summation. Thanks.
- OneMan - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 3:47 pm:
one more question, shouldn’t they have to use Rod’s legal name in these pleadings?
- Please - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:03 pm:
The Judge lets Bradley Tusk testify to what Blago was thinking at the time, yet the Judge doesn’t think defense lawyers should be allowed to ask Tusk anything beyond the FEDS story.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:03 pm:
Welcome to federal court. It’s a bummer to be a defendant there.
- heet101 - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:08 pm:
Please…they can ask him if they call him as a defense witness though, right? I don’t see that happening for some reason.
- formerGOPer - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:23 pm:
If I remember correctly, Blago said he’d be found innocent in a “fair trial”. This is part of the set up to explain that the guilty verdicts are not from a fair trial.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:30 pm:
Please,
I know this is hard to understand, but tell me if you think there is a difference in these two questions for Tusk:
Prosecution: What did you think the governor meant when he said xyz?
Defense: Are you saying the governor knew xyz was improper?
The first question asks Tusk what Tusk thought. The second asks Tusk what someone else thought.
Does that help explain the objections?
- Berkeley Bear - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:31 pm:
Please - When Federal judges tell you to stick to the scope of direct, they mean it. When they criticize how you are asking questions, they mean it. When they tell you to shut up, they mean it. These guys and gals don’t mess around. Zagel, by all accounts, gave them a fair amount of leeway at first, then brought the hammer down when they didn’t get the message. The fact the Adams posse doesn’t know the rules speaks to their inexperience in Federal court, not any plot on the part of Judge Zagel.
The point of cross-examination is to impeach or contextualize the evidence offered on direct, not elicit new information. If they want to get new information, they can call every single witness again. I’ve done it, and I’ve even seen the same witness called back to back as the last witness for one side and the first for the other.
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:32 pm:
@formerGOPer
In Blago’s mind the only ‘fair’ trial would be one that ONLY ended in vindication. Anything less is ‘unfair’.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 4:41 pm:
Shorter Zagel: It’s not my fault you don’t know how to cross examine a witness, but since you clearly don’t, I’m saving you from yourselves.
- Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 5:03 pm:
so it’s the same defense they used during the impeachment. Wah, wah, wah … if we could just get Barack Obama, MLK and Jesus to testify you’d see nothing bad happened but you won’t let us let them testify.
Exactly why do these guys have a reputation as being quality attorneys? Makes me think most of Chicago’s legal circles must be overrated.
- Jesus - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 5:17 pm:
Sorry Michelle, I was asked, but unfortunately I can’t make the trial. You can find my audio taped deposition (narrated by Charlton Heston) at several fine Christian bookstores, however.
- Bill - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 5:22 pm:
==Welcome to the big leagues, gentlemen==
You must be talking about that biased judge and the army of ausas. Shellie might be a hack but the Adams team is top notch. They know exactly what they are doing and things are going exactly according to the plan.
Remember, this is the same office that couldn’t fairly convict Goerge Ryan until the judge threw off jurors who were leaning toward aquittal. Our collection of blogger-pseudo-lawyers should probably go back and watch a few more episodes of Law and Order. I hope I never have the misfortune of hiring any of them unless it is to fix my drain. Rod will walk either by aquittal or on appeal due to obvious bias and errors madde by the judge.
It may be naive but I still beleive in the US justice system. Rod didn’t violate any laws and will be cut loose one way or the other. Then Super fitz can go back to trying to railroad republicans in Washington.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 5:32 pm:
Bill is on a roll! The vacation did you good, eh? lol
- Macoupin Observer - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 6:05 pm:
Bill (a.k.a. Capitol Fax Legal Analyst) obviously stayed at a Holiday Inn Express while on vaca!
- Park - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 7:37 pm:
Zagel went a little too far, and I’ll bet he’s feeling a little bit chastened right now. His rulings were narrowing the right to cross examine. That said, Adam had no chance for a mistrial. 7th Circuit will never reverse on this issue. But Adam will get more leeway from here out. Won’t matter….the jury will focus on the facts when they send him to jail.
I’m fascinated by the Balanoff/Stern involvement. Will they be the two who bring down the Obama administration? There appears to be a lot to examine in that relationship. Hope someone starts a real good audit of SEIU financials from about 2006 on. Will make a good election year story.
- Moving to Oklahoma - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 8:05 pm:
As I read through these posts a thought came to mind. Although it isn’t a plot by Zagel to convict Blago, the feds did in essence steer RBB to Judge Zagel by attaching his indictment to his brothers, which was already assigned to Judge Zagel. Its legal I suppose, but its blatant Judge shopping. Rod’s guilty either way, but I sort of understand why the Adams Family is feeling like they are trying to do the legal equivalent of drowning a fish.
- casual observer - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 8:31 pm:
To suggest that Federal Court is “THE BIG LEAGUE” as compared to the State courts betrays a lack of experience in both places. Yes , occasionally Federal court sees a high profile trial like this, but there are many more postal inspector type cases at 219, something no self respecting trial lawyer would consider big league And over at 26th Street , you can find murder trials daily in a number of courtrooms. Hardly small time. Both court systems have trial judges who like to dominate the courtroom, and Blago has one.
- Technically Speaking... - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 8:47 pm:
Actually, you CAN drown a fish… if it swims in water deprived of oxygen. And Zagel’s courtroom is not providing enough of it to feed the shuck-and jive act that is the Adam defense strategy.
- Gregor - Tuesday, Jun 22, 10 @ 8:49 pm:
I miss my law books, and I feel so sad;
I guess this ploy won’t run.
The worst defense team Rod ever had;
We fought the law, and the, law won.
- Toast - Wednesday, Jun 23, 10 @ 9:17 am:
Big Jim Thompson, who appointed most of the federal judges up North kept former Governor Ryan out of prison while on appeal. There will be an appeal, but Blago will go immediately to get fitted for his new suit.