[RetiredArmy]

His next appeal will be that he had ineffective counsel in the initial phases of his trial, and thus had to fire his first counsel (HIMSELF!!!!), so he is appealing that he was a stupid counsel, ineffective, and thus got him, the client, convicted!!!!

[dwd1]

His attorney objected, the judge strongly advised against it, and he would have to prove (once convicted, the burden shifts to him) that during the brief time that he acted in his own defense (and I believe his attorneys were still available and provided counsel), he did something that irreparably damaged his case... Without that, he is (what is that we like to spread jelly on in the morning? Oh! Yes!) toast!!!....

And I still think he is going to experience an unexpected decline in health if he is not well protected.... This will make his appeal a moot point...

And I am not sure he is going to have anyone stepping up to say, "Free this unjustly imprisoned man!"

[dwd1]

It's sort of a catch 22... If he had not been allowed to represent himself, he would appealed stating that he was not represented in the way he wanted to be... Since he was allowed to, he will be able to appeal citing inadequate counsel...

I don't think he has a case...

And he did not make any of the hard or circumstantial evidence against him stronger, weaker, or irrelevant... He simply got to have a "Perry Mason" moment...The moment is over and he is headed for his just reward...