[rolling_stone]

DW gave statments to the police, just like DVD and BVD did, you can see how they were crucified on the stand for inconcistencies. If one has given previous statements, it is difficult to get on the stand and not look bad, even if innocent. Yes I would like to get on the stand, but having seem studies on it, it takes much preperation to do it well. It is difficult for someone accused of such a terrible crime not to look guilty from fear or embarrasment, as many say they would rather be accused of murder than child molest, and here you get both accusations.

I think the times the defendant testifies is usually when there is eyewitness identification and little else to question. DW cannot testify how fibers or prints or blood got there if he is innocent and doesn't know, as such it would not help his case. It is more a technical issue IMO.

I guarantee you with very few exceptions defense attorneys recommend their client not testify.

[Hildy]

Well, how do you suppose the blood and fibers got on him. You have to admit that if he's innocent, he has to be the most unluckiest SOB on the planet.

[cynwoody]

I guarantee you with very few exceptions defense attorneys recommend their client not testify.

Click here for one prosecutor's analysis of this question. He gloats about defendants "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" by taking the stand.