There's something about Terry- Closing Arguments Day 2

It's hard to believe, but after over two months of proceedings, all that's left in the trial is the verdict. That's expected Wednesday August 12.

Edelson wrapped up his closing statements while the Crown gave a quick and brief rebuttal.

As the title suggests, most of Edelson's attention was directed at Kilrea.

Edelson carefully went through testimony that emerged from Kilea's cross examination, and testimony given by several other witnesses, including Reynolds, MacLeod, Light, and O'Brien.

Edelson's description of Kilrea is starkly different from Hutchison's characterization. Edleson called Kilrea devious, disingenuous, profane, deceitful, mean-spirited, and hypocritical. He called him "dumb like a fox and street smart", and said "you don't have to be a genius to do what Kilrea did".

Highlights from the Defence's closing arguments:

* Kilrea has a spotty memory. There are several phone calls that are unaccounted for by Kilrea- some taking place only minutes after the ones that Kilrea can recall

* Whenever Kilrea isn't able to explain evidence that contradicts his testimony he says he "can't recall". Edelson calls this the "refuge of a liar"

* Edelson gives several examples of times Kilrea misinterprets conversations and communications and then uses them to gain media attention. He says whenever Kilrea uses the phrase "that's the impression I got" it's a "Kilrea-ism" and it means he's lying

* Kilrea created the "perfect storm" that led him to fish for a new position: he was plunging in the polls; he was out of money; and he was unhappy about returning to his job

* Light's testimony was highly partisan. He was a Kilrea campaign worker who was in the "dirty tricks department" and nowhere near a genuine witness

* MacLeod gave different variations of what she heard O'Brien say and she didn't testify to hearing about the NPB until the Crown slipped and inserted it into questioning. Edelson says she didn't know the context of the comment and that it was vague. If O'Brien was working on an appointment, where's the evidence? If O'Brien wasn't working on an appointment what was the point of telling MacLeod?

* O'Brien's statement to police does not align with Kilrea's testimony. Kilrea brings up the NPB first and O'Brien says he feels there was some "baiting" going on. O'Brien tells police to contact Reynolds and Pantazopolous- why would he direct the police to them if he was worried?

Hutchison responded to several of Edelson's points. He says it is irrelevant who brought up the NPB appointment first; what matters is what happened afterward. Edelson spent some time analyzing different versions of Kilrea's affidavit but Hutchison says its common for there to be several versions when a third party (a lawyer) is penning the statement- it's not unusual for there to be "broken telephone" between the two parties. As for MacLeod's testimony, Hutchison said he did not insert the NPB into her memory because in her police statement months earlier, she had told police about the NPB by her own volition.

Finally, Edleson had mentioned it was possible there was a compromise of integrity in the emails gathered from Tierney's hard drive (these are all the emails between O'Brien, Kilrea and Baird). He says that Tierney was given a "heads up" that emails would be seized and therefore could have tampered with the evidence. Hutchison dismisses this saying there is no evidence to prove that, and that if Edelson wanted to explore this possibility he could have called Tierney to the stand himself.

Judge Cunningham said he had a "great deal to think about" and that he wanted to be "done as quickly as I can, but I want to give it a lot of thought and consideration."

Outside the courtroom, O'Brien appeared confident. He gave reporters the thumbs up and said "we're feeling pretty good."

Throughout the trial the Crown and the Defence have had very different approaches. While the Crown has kept its case narrow and simple, the Defence has expanded its case and focused on details. The Defence tried to cast enough doubt on the Crown's case to leave reasonable doubt in the Judge's mind that would prevent him from convicting O'Brien. We'll see on August 12 which side was successful.

Closing Arguments- Day 1

The Defence has decided not to call any witnesses so closing arguments have started.

Hutchison took about three hours to present his statements. Edelson began his today but we're off to an early start tomorrow to ensure that the Defence is able to finish in one day.

Highlights from the Crown's closing arguments:

* Kilrea's evidence is surrounded by a "matrix of corroborative evidence" that overcome any questions about his credibility

* O'Brien has admitted that the sole reason he met with Kilrea on July 12 was to give him a reason to quit the race

* Kilrea pegs the time of the July 12 meeting sometime between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. but can't give an exact time. Hutchison questions whether this kind of detail is that of someone making up a story. He says it's common for simple details to creep in and out of events a person is recalling honestly

* Though the dates were a week off in Kilrea's affidavit, when O'Brien was questioned about the meetings and calls during his police interview he also didn't dispute the dates even though he had seen the affidavit

* O'Brien says after July 12 the offer was off the table because he realized it was offside, but evidence from Lisa MacLeod and John Light show that weeks later the appointment was still being discussed

* O'Brien tells police at the beginning of his interview that his memory from the summer of 2006 is hazy because there was a lot going on and doesn't deny that several events happen, rather he says he doesn't remember them

* After Pantazopolous meets with Kilrea about polling numbers that show O'Brien has growth potential and Kilrea asks about the NPB: Pantazopolous testifies that O'Brien says to forget about Kilrea; they don't need him. Hutchison argues that if the NPB was dropped on July 12, O'Brien would have displayed surprise that Kilrea was still talking about it

* Under cross-examination Edelson tells Kilrea that when John Baird takes the stand he will testify that they spoke about the NPB at their meeting. Rather than yield, Kilrea stands by his evidence that it was never discussed, and later Baird corroborates that testimony

* Kilrea may not be the most sophisticated politician but he is not a Machiavellian schemer. He may be a blunderer, but he is not a criminal mastermind

* If Kilrea's testimony changed in some of the details it's because it is a true story. It is suspicious when a person is able to recount a story the exact same way each time; it indicates that it has been rehearsed

* The Crown hasn't shown that O'Brien could follow through with getting Kilrea a NPB appointment, rather it has shown O'Brien "clearly and undoubtedly" pretended to have influence in order to get Kilrea to drop out of the race; this is a quid pro quo

* From July 12 to August 7, all interactions between O'Brien and Kilrea amount to ongoing negotiations (as mentioned in the Sec. 125 charge)


The Defence introduced some of its final statements although the bulk will be presented tomorrow. So far Edelson has focused on the credibility of Kilrea, telling the court the witness has to be credible/reasonable beyond a reasonable doubt for the testimony to be completely accepted. Further, Edelson has argued:

* Kilrea's testimony shows that O'Brien never offered to get him a NPB appointment, rather Kilrea presented the option to O'Brien as something that he would be interested in. He says Kilrea was "fishing; pursuing; looking for an out." Kilrea raised the quid pro quo (aka "I'll drop out if you get me the NPB appointment")

* Kilrea had the ability to check his email and Tim Tierney's hard drive for accuracy in dates when writing his affidavit but never did. He was also asked several times by the police if he was sure he had the dates right, but he always said though he could be off, he would stick to those dates

* There are three or four different versions from Kilrea about the statement O'Brien allegedly made when he offered him the NPB (ex. "what if I can make that happen/ what if THAT can happen/ what would happen if I got you an appointment")