The jurors and alternates in the trial of former Honolulu businessman Michael J. Miske Jr. entered the courtroom Tuesday morning at 9 a.m.
Within minutes, Miske’s defense attorneys rested their case, and followed by prosecutors, who rested their rebuttal case without calling a single witness.
The trial, which started on January 6 with jury selection and pretrial matters, was suddenly nearing an end.
At 9:07 a.m., the jury too a break, and Miske’s attorneys again made an oral motion for a directed “judgement of acquittal.” A similar motion was made at the conclusion of the prosecution’s case, and at that time Judge Derrick Watson agreed that two charges related to the alleged attempted murder of Lindsey Kinney in an ambush at Kualoa Ranch had not been proven. These two counts were dismissed. At the same time, the government had withdrawn a single drug conspiracy charge. These left 16 charges intact.
Court minutes show that oral arguments were made Tuesday, but Judge Watson “reserved decision on this motion.”
At 10:10 a.m. the jury returned to the courtroom, where Judge Watson read the 156 pages of jury instructions, spelling out the legal parameters of each charge they will have to consider.
At 2:05 p.m., the jurors were excused and started a one-week break.
They will return at the end of next week. Prosecutors will make their closing argument on Thursday, July 11. The following day, the defense will put forward their best case, and prosecutors will have an opportunity to present a rebuttal. The jury will begin their deliberations on Monday, July 15, at 8:30 a.m., and will work through until 4:30. This schedule will be repeated until a verdict is reached. “Lunch will be provided,” according to the court minutes.
In all, the government’s case took about four months, the defense about three weeks.
Check out Madeleine Vierra’s story in Civil Beat, “Miske Defense Rests After Casting Doubt On Alleged Crime Boss’s Involvement In Conspiracy.”
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If the feds don’t land a conviction, this will look like a sham trial. It’s hard to believe how bad of a job prosecutors did on this case. I fear they left enough reasonable doubt on the table. They coulda called some harder hitting witnesses and really tightened that noose.
Unless you were in the trial, you don’t realize how extensive the testimony and evidence presented by the prosecution was over the 4+ months making their case. While several potential insider witnesses were not called to testify, there were likely very good reasons for those decisions.
Four hours of ‘jury instructions’ ? Yikes. These folks have been though a lot already. And thanks Ian for so much of your time/energy.