Attorney pleased mistrial denied

Kim Smith

Tuesday, March 20, 2001 | 10:59 a.m.

Defense attorney Michael Amador said he was pleased District Judge Joseph Bonaventure denied his motion for a mistrial in the Margaret Rudin murder trial.

"I won the motion by having it denied," Amador said Monday. "Her only chance of an acquittal is with us, with this trial."

Amador said he asked Bonaventure for the mistrial last week only because his client wanted him to. Rudin told the judge Thursday that she didn't believe Amador had sufficient time or money to prepare for trial.

Amador told the judge he wasn't prepared to move forward with the trial because he had devoted too much time to the forensic and financial aspects of the case. He also said his opening arguments suffered drastically from his lack of sleep in the days before the trial began March 2.

Amador's performance had been a topic of debate long before the mistrial issue surfaced, and many attorneys considered his request for a mistrial to be career suicide.

The former prosecutor rambled for three hours during his opening statement, causing Bonaventure to repeatedly chide him; his cross-examinations have lasted far longer than has normal questioning.

On Monday evening Amador said he was convinced he did the right thing by filing the mistrial motion, but at the same time, he is glad it was denied.

"The issues in this case give rise to some serious questions about what's best in the long run," Amador said. "If it was granted, the chances of her acquittal, in the long run, would have been substantially lower."

Amador said he believes he and fellow attorney Tom Pitaro still have an element of surprise on their side.

"The best part of the case is yet to come," Amador said.

As far as his presentation of the case, Amador said he has intentionally been asking certain witnesses open-ended questions in the hope of catching them in lies. Other witnesses require a more conventional questioning technique, he said.

It is far more difficult to ask questions as a defense attorney than as a prosecutor, Amador said.

However, Amador said he intends to pick up the pace throughout the rest of the trial.

"Every court is different, and I guess I should have adjusted my style to the court rather than expect the court to accept my style," Amador conceded.

Amador said he tries to not pay too much attention to the criticism.

"I appreciate valid critiques because it's helpful as long as I'm open-minded, but the shark-feed of the mindless pundits over things they neither understand nor appreciate, I don't appreciate," Amador said.

Amador said he doesn't believe the mistrial motion will affect his career, though it did humble him.

"Every five or six years lawyers need their eyes opened, and perhaps they need a lesson in humility," Amador said. "It helps them re-evaluate their style and become better lawyers."