I really do not understand the strategy of Ehud Olmert and his defense attorneys in this cross-examination of Moshe (Morris) Talansky.
We now have a headline, from today's cross examination that reads, "10:54 Olmert`s lawyers: Talansky ordered transfer of fund despite insistent denial (Haaretz)"
Wow. What a revelation.
But how does that help Olmert? While, yes, perhaps they are successfully making Talansky look worse than he did before, but how does any of this exonerate Olmert?
So instead of taking money from a guy who arranged cash donations, he took money from a money launderer (if Olmert's lawyers are correct) and all around sneaky guy...
How does any of this help Olmert's case?
It helps Olmert's case since the lawyers are trying to discredit the main witness (Talansky). It's the best option if there are no witnesses to contradict his testimony.
ReplyDeletebut he has already admitted, supposedly, to having taken money from Talansky. The debate has been how much and how often. But that matters even less if Talansky is a money launderer. Even if Olmert took less, less frequently, but he took it from a money launderer, his troubles are that much greater!
ReplyDeleteTalanksy's PR guy made the same point on the radio this morning. Olmert's lawyers pounded away at Talanksky about the $72,000 when it is recorded in Shula Zaken's diaries.
ReplyDeleteI amde a similar point here Olmerts attorneys making another mistake . They may be rigth from a legal perspective but from a PR perspective it is just making Olmert look worse and worse.