The Jason Williams Tax Fraud trial stretches into the ninth day with the jury still deliberating the guilt of the District Attorney and his law partner Nicole Burdett.
It was a fairly fast trial—especially since Williams and Burdett's attorneys did not put on an affirmative defense.
What does it mean for the jury to be out this long on what looked like a simple case? WWL asked noted criminal defense attorney Joseph Raspanti for his observations.
"Well it's a long deliberation, but it could mean anything," Raspanti explains. "Anyone who tries to predict the outcome of a trial based upon the length of the deliberations is a rookie or a fool."
Raspanti pointed out a misstep by the prosecution early on in the case:
"I think the prosecution struggled with their key witness, the tax preparer [Henry Timothy]. I think he was someone that the defense took advantage of in cross-examination. But I think that the prosecution did a lot better with their closing argument. They kind of came back from deficit toward the end of the trial."
Raspanti gives his thoughts on the defense strategy, choosing to not present an affirmative defense or even put Williams on the stand.
"It's a risk-reward situation. You choose not to put on a case so that you don't expose your client to cross-examination. But, jurors sometimes like to hear from a defendant 'hey I didn't do it'. So, you never know how it's going to work out. You never know if it's the right decision until you hear the verdict."
Finally, we asked Raspanti what happens if Williams and Burdett are found guilty:
"His political career could go on. But he is going to have to surrender his [law] license within 14 days of the verdict. And if you're not an attorney in good standing you cannot be the District Attorney, so he is going to have to give up that position."
We'll all be paying close attention to what's going on at Poydras and Magazine inside the Federal Court House.
