Legal experts weigh in on Rosfeld’s decision to testify |

Legal experts weigh in on Rosfeld’s decision to testify

Paul Guggenheimer

Legal experts called Michael Rosfeld’s decision to testify in his defense a risky strategy that likely will become the focal point of his homicide trial.

“It really becomes a critical moment in the trial,” said Bruce Antkowiak, a former federal prosecutor and law professor at Saint Vincent College.

“When the defendant testifies, while all other evidence remains important, so much of the case starts to focus on whether or not the jury reacts well to and believes the defendant,” Antkowiak said. “So much of the arguments are going to focus on the defendant’s testimony.”

Rosfeld, a former East Pittsburgh police officer, testified Thursday that he thought one of the two teens who ran from a June 19 traffic stop pointed a gun at him. He said he fired his weapon until the perceived threat was eliminated.

Antwon Rose II, 17, died after being shot three times.

In most cases, lawyers try to avoid having their clients testify.

But in this case, Antkowiak said Rosfeld probably had a better sense of what it meant to take the stand.

“How he portrays himself, how he characterizes what was in his mind at the time of the shooting, is as critical as the actual words that he used to describe it,” Antkowiak said.

Duquesne University law professor Wes Oliver said Rosfeld taking the stand could help humanize him.

“We have been viewing the story as, ‘Oh another officer who shot a black man.’

”Him testifying breaks the story out of this paradigm and says, ‘It’s not an officer who shot a black man, it’s Michael Rosfeld … how do you judge him?’” said Oliver.

But Oliver admits the strategy could backfire.

“Anytime your client testifies, how he handles the cross-examination, how he responds to the question of saying at one time he did see a weapon, then he said he didn’t,” Oliver said. “Those inconsistencies may or may not mean anything.”

Paul Guggenheimer is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Paul at 724-226-7706 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.