Skip to main content

View Diary: Libby's Testimony Dance (137 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    azale, 3goldens, xicara

    When Fitz implied they were trying to introduce it without putting Libby on the stand, Libby's team did not deny it. And as Fitz pointed out, defense made NO mention of Libby testifying during opening.

    At this point, they have left their options open for Libby to testify or not. But both Fitz and I (and I think Christy) lean towards believing they're not going to put Libby on the stand.

    This is the way democracy ends Not with a bomb But with a gavel -Max Baucus

    by emptywheel on Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 06:36:29 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Simply Fascinating (0+ / 0-)

      Defense counsel failing to state one way or another about Libby testifying is hardly consequential, unless their opening statement provided the summary of evidence they expect to provide, complete with names of witnesses.  In that case, the omission is meaningful.  Not having read the transcript of opening statement, I cannot say.

      That having been said, defense counsel must think Libby would be a terrible witness if he is not going to put him on the stand to aid the "I made a horrible mistake" defense.  The general rule is defendants do not take the stand unless they have to, and this is one of those cases where he clearly has to.

      And thanks for your extensive coverage and incisive comments.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site