Dally’s Testimony Called a Risky Move

Michael Dally’s decision to take the stand Monday in an eleventh-hour push to stay off death row was viewed widely by legal analysts as an extremely risky move that could turn into a dream scenario for prosecutors.

Although the convicted killer was able to tell jurors for the first time that he had nothing to do with the May 1996 murder of his wife, analysts warned that the penalty-phase strategy could backfire, largely because it exposes Dally to a tidal wave of tough cross-examination.

“It’s a gamble, and if it’s bad testimony it could be the final nail in the coffin,” said Laurie Levenson, associate dean at Loyola Law School. “It seems to me you only want to try this if you have a likable client, and there aren’t that many likable capital murder clients.”

Indeed, the 37-year-old Dally was portrayed throughout his seven-week trial as a drug-using womanizer who betrayed his wife and eventually persuaded his lover--Diana Haun--to kill the homemaker and mother of his two children.

Even his own attorney described Dally in closing arguments of the trial as a “rotten guy” who treated his wife abominably.

So what might prosecutors have been thinking when a defendant of questionable character decided to march up to the witness stand and speak on his own behalf?

“That’s lunch,” said Stanley I. Greenberg, a longtime criminal defense attorney in Los Angeles. “It’s like Mike Piazza looking at a fastball coming right down the middle of the plate.”

Despite the absence of physical evidence linking him directly to the crime, Dally was convicted earlier this month of masterminding the kidnapping and slaying of his wife, Sherri.

Haun was found guilty in September of carrying out the murder and was sentenced to life in prison without parole after a subsequent penalty trial.

A jury could hand the same sentence to Dally. Or it could invoke the death penalty, already having found him guilty of plotting the murder for financial gain and while lying in wait.

With his life hanging in the balance, Dally stunned courtroom observers by announcing Monday morning through his lawyer that he would conclude the high-profile trial by taking the stand himself.

“Michael Dally has asked to speak and he will speak,” defense attorney James M. Farley told the jury in a brief opening statement. “His life is in your hands.”

What eventually followed was a somber and soulful Dally who denied any involvement in the crime, professed undying love for his wife and wiped away tears while describing how they became high school sweethearts about two decades ago.

*

Some legal analysts said that perhaps it was not a bad strategy, one that could pay off if just one juror is persuaded to spare Dally’s life.

“We are talking about life and death, so I would speculate that the defendant believed he had nothing to lose,” said George Eskin, a former Ventura County prosecutor and defense attorney. “He’s got to persuade them to have some doubt about the validity of their initial verdict so they will have a tougher time returning a death verdict.”

But Eskin and others acknowledged that it’s a legal strategy fraught with danger, especially because it opens the door to in-depth cross-examination.

In fact, prosecutors seized on that Monday, spending nearly four hours questioning Dally’s sincerity and challenging his assertion that he played no part in his wife’s murder.

They have maintained that Dally not only knew about the plan to kill his wife, but was the driving force behind it.

*

“As a prosecutor, you’re delighted to see the defendant take the witness stand,” said Robert C. Bonner, who has sat on all sides of a courtroom, as a federal judge, federal prosecutor and, currently, as a criminal defense attorney.

“The reality is, a fair number of defendants actually convict themselves by testifying,” Bonner added, “especially if prosecutors have some significant ammunition to use against them.”

It is not known whether Dally testified against the advice of his lawyers. But several weeks ago, Superior Court Judge Charles W. Campbell Jr. told the defendant that it was his decision--and his alone--whether to testify during the first phase of the trial.

Legal analysts said the same holds true for the penalty phase. And while lawyers dole out their best advice, there’s no stopping some defendants from rising before jurors to profess their innocence.

“They all want to get up and take the stand and say how innocent they are until I explain the dangers,” Greenberg said. “Some do it despite your best advice. It’s human nature--people want to talk.”

DEFENDANT TAKES STAND

Convicted murderer tearfully denies involvement in his wife’s slaying. A1