Back in September, a list of potential witnesses who might be called to appear in the trial of former Kamaaina Termite owner, Michael J. Miske Jr. and two remaining co-defendants, was compiled and filed in court. About 2,000 prospective jurors received a questionnaire in which they were asked, along with other things, whether they knew any of the people on the list.

At that time, the list combined potential witnesses identified by attorneys for both the government and the defense, along with witnesses to or participants in alleged crimes of the Miske gang. The list ran 22 printed pages and included 758 names, including witnesses now living in Hawaii, California, Texas, Maryland, Utah, Virginia, New York, Alaska, Louisiana, Washington, Nevada, Arizona, Tennessee, North Carolina, Oregon, Montana, New Hampshire…they would be coming from almost everywhere in the country, it seems.

It was estimated, based on the number of potential witnesses, that prosecutors would take about 80 court days to make their case in chief, and the trial was expected to take six months to complete.

That was then.

The two sides have now submitted their final witness lists to the court, and the numbers have grown.

The government’s witness list alone is now up to 947 names, plus the names of attorneys who may make appearances. That’s an increase of 25% over the original 758 names.

And at this point, attorneys for the remaining defendants (Miske, John Stancil, and Delia Fabro-Miske) submitted their witness list with 274 names.

However, there appears to be substantial overlap between the two lists, and the total number of names will be substantially less than the 1,221 names on the combined lists.

In any case, that’s seems like a lot of testimony to somehow cram into a six-month trial, and it’s looking like it may be more like eight months before it’s over.

That means it is going to be a challenge for attorneys to assist jurors in keeping the most relevant testimony in their minds. This is where it seems the attorneys’ skills at story telling becomes critical. Who can weave the most persuasive or memorable tale based on the evidence presented? In the end, that probably counts as much as the evidence itself.

Any attorneys out there want to weigh in on the specific issues/problems that arise in such lengthy litigation?