Defendant in Palin hacking case won't testify

Associated Press ^ | April 26, 2010 | Associated Press

[libstripper]

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. -- The attorney for a former University of Tennessee student charged with hacking Sarah Palin's e-mail says the defendant will not testify in his federal trial in Knoxville.

[PUGACHEV]

Not putting the defendant on is a calculated risk. You have to weigh the damage his testimony may do against what the prosecution has already put into evidence. What many people do not understand is that if you begin to testify about a certain subject, you lose your right to refuse to testify later on that subject under the 5th Amendment when you are cross-examined. If you are reasonably sure that having your client testify will open up the door for the prosecution to ask questions you would rather not have your client answer, then you must consider not putting him on. The obvious problem is that, despite the fact that the court will advise the jury that no inference can be drawn in a criminal case if the defendant chooses not to testify, only an idiot would believe that the jury is going to take that admonition seriously.

[danamco]

He would have been threaded to pieces if he was faced with cross/examination!!!

[Star Traveler]

You were saying ...

Anybody who thinks for a moment the hacking of Palin’s email was just an “innocent” prank by a dumb kid, is even dumber than the hacker.

I don't know the "make-up" of the jury selection, but I would say that the smartest move that the defense could have done -- would be to have parents in the jury pool... because parents actually do know how "stupid their kids are" ... LOL ...

And I'm saying that as a staunch defender of Palin and I think the kid did engage in a crime... as I've said before on previous threads on this topic.

It's just that I also know how stupid kids are (and some parents have stupid 25-year old kids, too... doncha know...).

[Tijeras_Slim]

In my experience:

Barrister Fierro...

[danamco]

From the defense’s point of view, the smartest thing they could do!!!

[tioga]

they could make money with a pay per view of that cross examination......too bad he’s such a coward he won’t take the stand.

[bigbob]

I have no problem with him getting a good defense, I just hope people, including the judge, are fed up with hackers, spammers, identify thieves and punks like this to start sending a strong message that jacking someone’s email is as serious as jacking their car or any other “theft of” crime.

[skeeter]

No background on the perp yet? Curious lack of intereston APs part... /s

[Gay State Conservative]

From what I understand, in general, the only reason the defendant should testify is the defense team believes (s)he will be be convicted otherwise. It's a last-ditch attempt to gain credibility for the defense's case.

I'm sure that that's the attitude of the typical (US) defense lawyer.And it's understandable because,as Dershowitz *himself* once acknowledged,most criminal defendants are,in fact,guilty as charged.But if I'm on trial and I am,in fact,*not* guilty them I'm testifying.I wouldn't fear the prosecutor.I'd answer his/her questions plainly,calmly and respectfully...regardless of how piggish he/she is to me.By my answers...and my demeanor...I'd make even the most skilled prosecutor look,at best,foolish...if not down right evil.

What I've just said only applies if I'm innocent.Given that I'm a very poor liar and an even worse actor I'd never be a match for *any* prosecutor if I was guilty...so I wouldn't even try.If you're ever a juror at a trial where *I'm* the defendant you'll know I'm innocent if I testify...and guilty if I don't.

An example...from fiction.Shawshank Redemption...opening trial scene.The defendant,who is *not* guilty,as we learn later,is asked by the prosecutor..."hmmm...,you claim not to have done it but when asked to produce the gun you've spoken of to confirm your story it cannot be found.Now isn't *that* convenient?!" His response,delivered firmly yet calmly,"given that I'm not guilty I find it decidedly *inconvenient* that the gun cannot be found".

Yes,he was convicted...but he would have been convicted anyway.

[Beowulf9]

Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

[martin_fierro]

Don’t make me your One Phone Call.

< |xP~

[chris_bdba]

IMHO he would do himself a lot of good if he wiped the constant smirk off of his face. That usually doesn’t go over too well with juries. I’ve heard the areais heavily republican so his plead being a prank at his age probably won’t go over vbery well. He isn’t 14 afterall!

[llevrok]

How can it be racism if they're both white

Everything conservatives do is racism to liberals. So why not the same for them?

[Josh Painter]

Terry Franks posted screen shots of young Kernell’s Facebook page shortly after his mail fraud became public:

http://terryfrank.net/?p=3591

Kernell described himself as an Obamacrat and listed Obama and the disgraced John Edwards as Facebook Friends. He listed FB groups such as “UT Students for Obama” and “Anti-War, Pro Kittens” (which has an avatar of Georg W. Bush eating a kitten). The little Democrat dirty trickster is also a big Colbert fan. Go figure...

- JP

[Sarah Barracuda]

He doesn’t want to testify because he would be forced to admit who told him to do this..it was definitely not him..he is not smart enough to come up with this idea on his own. Just look at him, probably has the IQ of 60..someone should hack into HIS account and follow the trail

[Coldwater Creek]

Whatya want to know? David Kernell is a former UT student, a Memphian and the son of a Democrat politician.

[dalight]

Palin put her finger on this during the interviews that followed her testimony. This young man's lawyers did him no service by bringing this to Court. They should have copped a plea, and he would have a chance to take a good knuckle bashing and move on... but now, he is in deep doo doo.

The Testimony has been so overwhelming that it would essentially take jury nullification to save him from his well deserved fate. And, I just don't think that is very likely.

[Star Traveler]

Here are a series of FReeper articles on the E-mail Hacker, David Kernell and Sarah Palin ...

---

• Palin Testifies At E-Mail Hacking Trial

• Sarah Palin testifies in e-mail hacking case

• (CBS, FOXVideo) Sarah Palin On E-Mail Hacker: 'Sad State Of Affairs'

• Palin Testifies in E-mail Hacking Case (Drudge Headline)

• Palin on Greta to discuss David Kernell Trial

• Palin Testifies As The FBI Details an Elaborate Coverup By Defendant in the E-Mail Hacking Case

• Palin on Hackers and Illegal Immigration

• Defendant in Palin hacking case won't testify

• Prosecutor urges jurors to convict student in Palin e-mail trial (Jury to Deliberate tomorrow)

• Jury to get Palin case after Kernell opts not to testify

• Palin email witness decries 'dog and pony' prosecution

• Still No Verdict in Palin email Trial

• No End In Sight For Palin E-mail Hacking Case

• Breaking - jurors reported they have reached a verdict on 3 of 4 charges in Palin hacking trial

• Judge presents 'dynamite charge' to stuck Palin e-mail jurors

• Jury convicts Palin e-mail intruder on two counts

• Palin hacker found guilty on two counts

• Sarah Palin: As Watergate Taught Us, We Reject Illegally Breaking Into A Candidates’ Communications

• Jury convicts Palin e-mail intruder on 2 counts; mistrial declared on ID theft

• JURY FINDS PALIN HACKER GUILTY

• ...Man Convicted of Illegally Accessing Sarah Palin's E-mail Account and Obstruction of Justice