Thread by @alanfeuer

A day after the prosecution in the Chapo trial rested its epic, 10-week presentation to the jury, Chapo's lawyer, Jeff Lichtman, mounted a defense of the kingpin.
It took exactly 30 minutes and consisted of one witness and a single stipulation.

The witness was an FBI agent called (for hard to fathom reasons) to explain his own small role in obtaining a piece of evidence that wasn't even directly related to Chapo. At issue: whether a US or Colombian naval intelligence officer gave sensitive info to a witness in the case.

Other evidence to the contrary the agent's notes from interviewing the witness, the drug lord Jorge Cifuentes, said it was a US intel officer. That may allow Lichtman to argue to the jury (as he did in openings) that the US & Mexico conspired vs. Chapo w/his partner Mayo Zambada.

Then again, Lichtman might not be able to argue this conspiracy again. Late last night, the government filed a motion to preclude just such an argument saying it was "preposterous" and not supported by the evidence.

The stipulation?
It certified that from 2007-2013 Chapo was in debt to the tune of $20 million.
Hard to see how that's dispositive of his innocence but it does allow Lichtman to argue that Chapo wasn't always the billionaire narco lord he was said to be.

There was never really a defense for Chapo to begin with and the 30-minute jury case proves it better than anything. Judge Cogan shut down several possible avenues and the mountainous evidence against the kingpin shut down the rest.

Then again, given that the lawyers never stood a chance of winning the case, they had nothing to lose.
Why did they take it in the first place? How do you not at least try to defend one of the most famous criminals on the planet? It's what top-notch defense lawyers do.

We know very little about how much--or even how, for that matter--the lawyers were paid. They have not spoken about it publicly. The govt has a multi-billion dollar forfeiture claim against Chapo so it remains unclear where his assets are and how much will be tied up by the feds.

But we do know that some of the lawyers worked without being paid for a while. Even with the virtual certainty of a conviction, it's the case of a lifetime for any lawyer. The fact that there was almost nothing they could do in the courtroom doesn't really change that fact.

I want to clarify this tweet:
It was meant to say: Top notch defense lawyers will always jump at the opportunity to defend a big client--even in a tough case like this one. (I.e. How could they not?)
It was not a slight against the efforts of the legal team in Chapo's case.