Trial Attorney Says; Apparently, The Witness Has Been Ingratiated With The Family For Years, Refusin

TL;DR

The witnesses in the Adelson trial seem to be protecting the Adelson family, making it difficult for the prosecution to implicate them. The defense is capitalizing on the lack of evidence against the Adelsons.

Transcript

welcome back to long crime everybody I'm Jesse Weber I'm joined here on set by trial attorney Armond Calvin and also joining us is attorney Terry Austin we're breaking down a lot here on the network huh all right our mom you have a witness here in my opinion seems a bit aloof a bit of Asaph doesn't really seem to be providing the answers maybe the ... Read More

Key Insights

• 🧍 Witnesses who have long-standing relationships with the Adelson family are reluctant to implicate them, hindering the prosecution.
• 💨 The absence of the Adelsons at the defense table draws attention away from the defendants in the room.
• 🖤 The defense capitalizes on the lack of evidence directly linking the Adelsons to the crime.
• 🈂️ The prosecution may be waiting to gather more evidence before charging the Adelsons.
• 💁 The voicemail between Charlie Adelson and his assistant suggests his attempt to hide information from the police.
• 💼 The defense can argue that the prosecution's focus on the Adelsons distracts from the case against the defendants.
• 😵 Cross-examination may not always be necessary if there is nothing to gain from it.

Questions & Answers

Q: Why is the witness not giving the answers the prosecution is looking for?

The witness has known and worked closely with the Adelson family for decades and seems to be protecting them out of loyalty and fear of reprisal.

Q: Why haven't the Adelsons been charged yet?

The prosecution may be waiting to gather more evidence and build a strong case against them, which may require the conviction of the other defendants first.

Q: How does the defense work around the incriminating phone call between Charlie Adelson and Erica Johnson?

The defense may argue that the absence of the Adelsons in the courtroom weakens the prosecution's case and that the phone call could be open to interpretation, suggesting privacy concerns rather than implicating their clients.

Q: What is the significance of the voicemail played in court?

The voicemail shows that Charlie Adelson did not want his assistant to cooperate with the police, potentially indicating his involvement in the crime and the hiring of the defendants.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The witness in question appears aloof and is avoiding implicating the Adelson family, who are believed to have hired the hitman.

• The prosecution gains very little from the testimony, except for establishing that Katie did not actually work at the Adelson Institute.

• The absence of the Adelsons at the defense table poses a challenge for the prosecution in convincing the jury of their involvement in the crime.