U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska
Court Calendar for Thursday, September 20, 2007
9:00 AM | 3:07-CR-00056-01-JWS | Judge Sedwick | Anchorage Courtroom 3 | |
USA vs. PETER KOTT TRIAL BY JURY - DAY 12 |
The defense has me baffled. This morning they have picked up from where they left off yesterday afternoon, going line by line through the code of the official legislative history of the Petroleum Profits Bill (PPT). They are now into the second special session called by the Governor. I really have no idea where Wendt is taking this. I thought he was trying to make the point that Kott was not doing Allen’s bidding. Basically, the other people I’ve asked have said variations of the same. “They’re trying to show he didn’t help Allen with the bill.” “That he was in no position to amend the bill.”
But in order to do so, Kott has had to compromise himself in several way.
1. He's confessed that he was tricky and deceitful:
PK: There was a bit of deceit with Rep Berkowitz. I didn’t know at the time he knew what I was up to. I felt somewhat disappointed in myself.
PK: I wanted to make a point, but I didn’t feel real comfortable about it. Violated what I perceived as my ethics. Especially with Mr. Berkowitz.
Well, if he was deceitful then, why not now in court to save his neck?
2. By making one point for Kott, he seems to give away other points
He wants to show he’s independent of Allen and Smith so:
- at the restaurant in DC he talks with a Marathon Oil Rep. Rick Smith tells him by phone that any change (like the one Marathon wants to exempt Cook Inlet oil) would jeopardize the bill. Kott testifies, “Smith was just blowing smoke.” But yesterday he said Smith and Allen were the only people who always told him the truth. Now he’s saying Smith was lying to him. Hmmm.
- He was worried that Allen might question his loyalty because Allen could see him on the Gavel to Gavel coverage of the debates conferring with Democrats. “Allen was very conservative and he could see me conferring with Democrats.” Again, what happened to that great trust and friendship they had? Just talking to Democrats is going to jeopardize all those years of bonding he talked about yesterday?
I can understand that calling Kott as a witness was a way to change the terrible image of Kott the jury got from watching and listening to the tapes. That was a really damaging image. And on the stand, Kott looks very sober and knowledgeable about all the strategies of the legislature. This certainly improves the picture of Kott himself.
But the downside is that prosecution now can question Kott. The defense has proven itself time and again to be well prepared. I can’t imagine any gains Kott may get from his testimony for his own attorney surviving the cross examination this afternoon.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.