BishopAccountability.org
	Law Expert: Judge Walther "More Than Patient" By Michael Kelly San Angelo Standard-Times August 5, 2011 http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2011/aug/04/law-expert-judge-more-patient/ The judge in the Warren Jeffs case seems to have navigated a legal minefield with superb skill, a Texas law authority said Thursday. Jeffs invoked his constitutional right to self-representation in a surprise move last week after jury selection was finished, and put forward a defense that seemed to rest on religious freedom. Jeffs offered the jury a lengthy opening statement on his religious beliefs Wednesday after the prosecution rested its case, then called a witness who for the most part read excerpts from the Book of Mormon and other religious texts, as directed by Jeffs from the defense table. The testimony of the witness, J.D. Roundy, an FLDS member, lasted more than four hours Wednesday. When Jeffs recalled Roundy on Thursday morning and began the same process, 51st District Judge Walther cut him short and told him his defense was finished, announcing that closing arguments would be restricted to 30 minutes. “She’s been more than patient,” said Patrick Menze, a professor at Texas Tech School of Law, when told about the trial. “I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, but from my view she’s been more than patient to allow him the opportunity to present a defense, and I really don’t feel an appeals court will criticize her.” Menze cautioned, “I never try to guess how an appeals court will rule on something, but I would find it strange if a court would find that this judge overstepped her bounds.” During Jeffs’ examination of Roundy, special prosecutor Eric Nichols objected 25 times to Jeffs’ line of questioning meant to educate the jury on his religious beliefs, repeatedly arguing that Jeffs’ faith was not relevant to the sexual assault charges before the court. Walther allowed Jeffs to continue, admonishing him to move his questioning along, and saying at one point, “Mr. Jeffs, I do not understand your defense.” She also noted for Nichols that the subject of plural marriage had been introduced by the prosecution’s evidence, and then told Jeffs to continue. “A judge is only required to let it go so long,” Menze said, adding that there is an obligation to keep the trial moving. He said Walther easily could have ordered Jeffs’ attorneys to resume his defense. “I’m surprised at some point the judge didn’t just have enough of it and tell counsel to take over, but it’s her job to enforce the Constitution, and I’m proud of her for letting him do it, even if it made some people uncomfortable.” When Jeffs was given the opportunity to deliver a closing argument to the jury, he stood in silence for half an hour, saying only, “I am at peace” about 24 minutes into his time. Walther reminded him every five minutes of the amount of time he had left to speak to the jury. That 10-woman, two-man jury, Menze said, would have been selected as part of a strategy by the attorneys that Jeffs dismissed. “If counsel picked that jury, they had a reason for letting everyone on to that jury that got on it,” he said. “Those they struck, they struck for a reason,” he said. “They would have calculated and made conscious decisions based on a game plan, but that would have been thrown out when Jeffs changed things.”
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.