Has Blago Judge Devastated the Defense?

During an afternoon break, Judge James Zagel responded to a motion the defense filed today asking for a mistrial because of the judge repeatedly sustaining the prosecution’s objections during cross-examination. Blagojevich’s attorneys say this has interfered with their ability to have a fair trial.

“In the alternative,” the motion reads, “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.”

While some may be quick to dismiss this as mere legal wrangling, a former federal prosecutor told the Chicago News Cooperative today that Zagel may have already done irreparable damage to the defense, having regularly chided Blagojevich’s attorneys in the presence of the jury.

The former prosecutor, who did not want to be named, explained it thusly:

“In a long trial, I believe the credibility of the lawyers can be more important than that of any single witness – excluding, of course, the defendant. The jury will see a lot of witnesses come and go from the courtroom, but they are going to see the lawyers as the daily messengers of the case. Ultimately, it is only natural that jurors come to make judgments about the trustworthiness of the lawyers’ message. The trial judge is generally held in high regard by the jurors, and in some sense, become the omniscient one. When Judge Zagel starts criticizing the presentation of the lawyers, and worse, calls into question the good faith of a question in front of the jury, it can have a devastating impact.”