This thread became much more interesting when the focus returned to the specific charges and course of AP's trial, securities fraud, RICO, extortion, obstruction of justice allegations, the facts surrounding the allegations, defense counsel and prosecutor's arguments. Someone asked me why post here. It's because this trial contains RICO causes of action against a former leader in the trading industry, claims in some ways similar to the RICO claims I've brought in federal court: SI figures, online investment advice, and so much allegedly not disclosed to the public.
In fairness I think the 9/11 discussion was off-base, because AP does NOT stand accused of anything related to 9/11. Not my place to criticize a a federal prosecutor and he knows the case better than any of us here ever will, but bringing that up in closing argument I would agree with posters here seemed inflammatory and unnecessary, what with the evidence of destruction of chat logs, trading on non-public FBI database info, aliases not just online but at airports. One of the defense attorneys I faced representing adversaries, while self-serving surely, once gave me some nevertheless extremely valuable advice and it was never to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, do not allow extraneous arguments, even if provable, make the main argument lose steam, don't be diffuse. Major defense tactic is to obfuscate matters, avoid answering the main allegations at all costs, dance a jig so the emphasis moves elsewhere, cloud the main issues. So, when Berber and Moor moved for sanctions and an injunction, which they did not get on 12/3, when Rea perjured himself, I have not responded in kind. The big picture is discovery and trial. |
